Objective realism-note:v
philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR .pdf : p.26: ft.99: "Much earlier versions of this material were presented to the Society for Realist/Anti-Realist Discussion at the Annual Meeting of the American Philosophical Association Eastern Division, Washington, D.C, December 2006, and at the Annual Meeting of the North Carolina Philosophical Society, High Point, February 2007. I thank members of my audiences on these occasions, John Carroll, Mark Timmons, Mary Tjiattas, and the Editor of The Philosophical Forum for useful inputs. I owe special thanks to William Randolph Carter ("Randy"), 1940-2010. for helpful discussions of this and other work. I dedicate this paper to his memory.", Realism: True-/False-determinant, Reference to "largely mind-independent world". (I assume mind-independent except the self-ascribed mind-states.),
Objectivism: coherence, mostly able for speakers to grasp, biased towards the topic-subject and the philosophy only, Output Requirement: having a robust primary standard with secondary standards, Grounding requirement: thoughtful, reflective, careful, independent topic-engagers independently agreeing 100%. (2026.04.07/archive .org/details/full-text-internet-archive/page/n12/mode/1up : p.13: "map, drawn and computed out of two orders, is as near the truth as it could be done in this place either by care or diligence." kinda contradicts thoughtfulness by cafe or diligence by grounding requirement in the year 1750 borrowed as book by 2026.04.07/borrowing.stir .ac .uk/search/p-1/pubplaces|London/0/simple/bdate|1750BC-05-01_1750-07-30 in highest genius-significance London according to Charles Murray  directly and Jonathan Israel indirectly by pointing out the the most extreme enlightenment-fraction are the Spinozists, rationalists across 3 enlightened other fractions, the Leibnizian-Wolffian as more rationalist, the Cartesian/rationalist-Malebranchian/Skeptic & the Newtonian-Lockian/more empiricist. Epistemology in nature and with empiricism and rationalism together are questioning as moderate, infinite regress in nature by making reason looks provisional. The Londoners arguably were the only candidate that could with their empiricism pulls their average position away from enlightened reason-rationalism and intellectual skepticism in nature in intellectualism according to philosophyball but also in Parisian culture according to Jonathan Israel's separation of philosophical fractions and description of Malebranche. Question lies in how empirical Jonathan Israel saws London/British culture, since an Anoox-forum says that Britain always has neben against foreign rationalism and since the British aren't so rational to begin with, that makes them effectively less rational. That balance between empirical fundamentalism, rational circularism, and infinite regressing questioning/skepticism with objective realism being seen as moderate skeptic and from Michael Pendlebury as minimally reasonable and from the philosophy-forum which Michael Pendlebury was in, as provisionally reasonable which constantly begging the question as minimal-reason described by Michael Pendlebury made higher significance-score of geniuses in physics meaning that the geniuses manipulates physical reality easier and more efficient and also the balance between common sense realism and objectivity more likely in London than in Paris or non-HRE, non-holy-city, non-Catholic, western half of Germany, German city. Some article being called efficient with fewer inventions and proto-world-city between common Sense realism in early modernity in 1500-1750 and objectivism in late modern 1750-1900.); 2025.03.05: DebateArena: late 17th to early 18th was peak enlightenment empiricism with David Hume and peak enlightenment rationalism was mid to late 18th century. So mentioned Kant synthesizing those two at late 18th century as rational empiricism. Empiricism practically leads to elite influence axed on experience. Pragmatism can sometimes to a rule by the strong if those in power prioritize effectiveness over fairness.; 2025.03.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy) : "This stronger formulation of naturalism is commonly referred to as metaphysical naturalism.[3] On the other hand, the more moderate view that naturalism should be assumed in one's working methods as the current paradigm, without any further consideration of whether naturalism is true in the robust metaphysical sense, is called methodological naturalism."; 2023-2024: called constitutivism? ; 2024.03.11/philarchive .org/archive/SHASRE-3 : p.22: "This is especially important for those of us who abide by the tenets of naturalism. Naturalists, in particular, must be careful not to speculate about the relevant science that may or may not support broadly philosophical views."; 2024: Constitutionalism?; 2024: Analogical realism; 2025.05.05/shs.hal.science/halshs-00686827/document : p.2: "systematically analyze the uses of “analog” and its cognates (analogies, analogous, etc.) in the Philo- sophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London for the period 1665– 1780.", "uses of analogy are ancient. It can even be argued that analogical thinking is the most basic cognitive tool humans have to move from the unknown to the known (Gentner et al. 2001)."..."“analogies are useful when it is desired to compare an unfamiliar system with one that is better known” (Olson 1943, p. i).", p.3: "Many studies have looked at particular uses of analogies among the ma- jor actors in the emergence of modern science at the beginning of the 17th century (see for example Daston 1984; Galison 1984; Shea 2000; Simon 2000). The object of this paper is not to add another name to that list but to describe more generally the various uses that have been made of analo- gies in 17th and 18th century science (before the emergence of distinct scientific disciplines) among general scientiac practitioners who published their results in the journal of the Royal Society of London. By looking at the presence of the word “analogy” and its cognates “analogical,” “analo- gous,” “analogue,” in all the papers published in the Philosophical Transac- tions of the Royal Society of London (hereafter PT) from its beginnings in 1665 to 1780, we can assess the spread of analogical thinking among the “rank and file” of the scientiac field during the period covered", p.4: "We stop our analysis around 1780 because we think that by that time the different types of uses have been identified."... progressive rise in the use of analogies observed after 1780 suggests a change of regime in scientific argumentation. Figure 1 shoes that, for the period 1665-1780, the words "analog*" were present in about 6% of the papers and reviews. however, after 1780 there is a rapid increase in frequency through no new type of use emerges at least before the middle of the 19th century when mathematical analogies will become frequent in physics. ... By 1780 occult sciences are no longer a legitimate refeeence and one could probably use analogies without the danger of being attacked for invoking occult qualities or making ontological connections between different orders of things. By comparison, for the decade 1991–2000, around 36% of papers in PT contain at least once the word analog*, a proportion similar to that obtained during the 19th century. Note that during the period 1665-1780 only about half of the papers contain illustrations like images of natural objects or geometrical figures. 
p.6: were not yet well-defined disciplines, and where the actors (natural philosophers) were not yet “scientists” trained in a more homogenous and spe- cialized manner.
p.7: 4% of the documents containing analog are explicit comments about the unreliability of reasoning by analogy. Physician Caspari Bartholini is approvingly reported: anatomists of te past have neglected "to consult Nature herself, and acquiesce in nothing but Experiment" (Anonymous 1676, p. 768) They relies too much on analogies based on "light observation of a few circumstances" (p. 769). Analogy, even if it can be used, is in general a bad alternative to direct observation and experimentation. (Empiricism being more used in Early modern period.) The use and abuse of analogy should not surprise us. according to Tubercilo Needham (1748), we have a propensity to infer by analogy. He argues that: The Method of Reasoning by Analogy is but too apt to lead us into Mistakes, and therefore we ought to be very different of conse-
p.8: "Between 1665 and 1780, 358 documents (articles, review, letters) con- taining at least one word of the analog* family appeared in the PT.5 If we use actual deanitions of disciplines, the discipline most represented in our corpus is by far the duo biology-medicine, followed by astronomy-physics, and then by mathematics. Other research aelds, like geology and chemis- try, are represented only to a limited extent.", "Practical uses are divided into six categories. An analogy can refer to (1) a general scientiac principle or (2) to a concrete model; it can (3) illustrate or clarify an argument, (4) ref- er to a proportionality relation or (5) serve as a basis for a classiacation. Finally, an analogy can (6) be used to propose and justify a prediction.", "In the chosen corpus the use of speciac analogies is the norm.", The singularity of the unknown is thus diminished by the use of an analogy, but without a careful investigation this satisfaction read, Needham argues, on a self-deception., p.30: "23 of the 358 corpus documents, most of them written in Latin, were omitted from the analysis because we could not obtain reliable translations. Though Latin texts are thus excluded we see no reason to expect new types of analogies to emerge only in Latin texts.",
p.9: "It could seem paradoxical that their mistrust of the reasoning by anal- ogy did not stop Needham or Bartholini from using them. Indeed we do not and in the chosen corpus a general critique of the uses of analogy. In other words, the problem cannot be the use of reasoning by analogy in general, but its use as a means of demonstration above its heuristic value. Limited heuristic uses are perfectly acceptable. In order to establish a causal relation between a state of the intestine and a speciac disease, St. André (1717) asserts that the symptoms should be compared to symptoms of other diseases “by Analogy of the Parts, Reason and repeated Experi- ence” (p. 581). In a aeld where causal relations are difacult to demon- strate, analogy can be used in a complementary way with Reason and Ex- periment." (Unifying rationalism and empiricism.), "Horsley implicitly refers to a sort of principle of analogy, which asserts that a hypothesis is more probable if you present one or more similar cases.6 The fact that Horsley insists that the analogy needs to be “plausi- ble” implies that not all analogies will do. One that is at least compatible with the “physical theory” is probably required, though the author is not speciac on that point."
p.10:"As argued by Vickers (1984), the occult and the scientiac mentalities did not disagree about the usefulness of analogy. The contested point was that the occult tradition collapses analogy to identity thus making analogy a metaphysical principle. Most natural philosophers were against that position. One thing is clear though: most uses of anal- ogy are found at the practical level where it is taken for granted as a valid way of thinking which does not have to be explicitly justiaed.", "4.2 Analogy as a General Scientiac Principle
A arst type of practical use found in our corpus of texts is one that has now become obsolete and foreign to the modern way of scientiac thinking. In contemporary scientiac discourse scientists do not use the word “analogy” to refer to a general principle of uniformity of nature. Until at least the second half of the 18th century however, we and references to a principle of “analogy of nature.” It is worth noting however that the number of oc- currences in the corpus where the word “analogy” seems to refer to a uniacation principle is very small (around 3% of documents containing analog*).", "By his use of “Analogy,” Cassini refers to a principle of cosmic order or harmony. This order can be understood on the basis of two principles: (1) a nomological principle: the same physical laws are equally valid in every parts of the universe. In particular, satellites of different planets are subject to the same laws. (2) A similarity principle: the different parts of the universe are furnished in an equivalent or at least structurally similar way.7 Based on these two principles we are justiaed in applying what we know about “here” to what we do not know about “over there.” It is useful to distinguish the two principles rather than to amal- gamate them in a single principle of uniformity of nature’s action. The other planets could be ontologically similar to Earth but not obey exactly the same laws. On the other hand, other planetary systems could be fur- nished in a different way, because of their origins, but obey the same phys-
7. In a deterministic world if the arst principle holds the second principle implies a similarity of initial conditions in the different parts of the universe.",
p.11: "Cassini is not reasoning by analogy to explain or predict something. Rather, he is asserting the uniformity and uniacation of nature in the celestial realm.",
p.12: "here Newton uses the expression “analogy of nature” to refer to an ontological uniacation principle. It allows Newton to assert that from observable phenomena we can legitimately infer prop- erties of unobservable entities like atoms. Where Cassini was unifying parts of the celestial realms, Newton is relating different scales in the chain of beings.
All these principles, which are conarmed by observations and experi- ments, are used to justify general conclusions based on a limited set of data. Here analogy plays on two levels. (1) Analogous, or more precisely similar, observations and experiments are invoked to justify a general the- oretical framework, like the mechanical framework (this is, in part, what Cassini and Molyneux are arguing). (2) Once the framework is assumed, the included scientiac principles allow the natural philosophers to inter- pret the newly encountered phenomenon as part of an analogous class (this is, in part, what Halley, Stuart and Mendez Da Costa are doing).9 In our corpus, we mostly see cases where analogies are expression of a commit- ment to the given framework (level 2).
4.3 Analogies as Concrete Models
In order to represent a phenomenon it is not uncommon to resort to a con- crete object (a model). The cases discussed here are all examples where the model is said to be analogous to the phenomenon under study. In fact, it is because they are analogous that they represent.",
p.14: "epistemolog- ical strategy of Gooch can be reconstructed using the steps developed by Hughes (1997): (a) Denotation: the phenomenon (human aneurysm) is"
p.15: "represented by a model (induced aneurysms in animal thigh); (b) Demon- stration: a surgical procedure is developed by working on the model; (c) Interpretation: what has been learned about the model is transposed to the phenomenon under study. The conadence in the developed surgical procedure comes from the belief that the animal aneurysms are identical in most relevant ways to human aneurysms.", "Analogies as Illustrations",
p.25: "current scientiac literature, analogies are often part of what can be called arguments from analogy. In such arguments, the analogy is used to support a conclusion, where some properties of a target object are inferred on the basis of analogous properties present in the source object. As is well known, this form of inference is not generally valid in the deductive sense. Nevertheless, it seems that a principle of analogy, like the one mentioned above (see footnote 7), is often assumed in our corpus. It seems generally believed that a hypothesis is more probable when one ands one or more similar cases. Unfortunately, we did not and in the corpus an explicit dis- cussion relating argument from analogy and probability theory. Therefore reasoning from analogy was in practice considered by natural philosophers of the time an acceptable kind of inductive reasoning.", 
p.30: "seven types of analogy are not used in the same propor- tions. Reoexive uses, analogy as principle and analogy as model, account for only 3% each. As much interest as been recently accorded to models in science (Morgan and Morrisson 1999; de Chadarevian and Hopwook 2004), this relative scarcity of explicit modelling during the period stud- ied here (1665–1780), compared to other uses of analogy suggests that such modelling maybe relatively recent. 91% of the uses of analogy are distributed evenly between illustration (18%), proportion (17%), and pre- diction (22%), with classiacatory uses being the most frequent with 32% of the identiaed uses.12
Let us look in more detail at the four uses for which we have the best statistics. Illustrative uses can be found in all research aelds, though they are clearly underrepresented in astronomy, mathematics, and geology, and overrepresented in chemistry. This distribution can be expected since il- lustrative analogies are obviously an appropriate communication device to describe new discoveries, of chemical products for example, for which we do not yet possess a shared descriptive vocabulary. Inversely the deacit of illustrative analogies in the case of geology, astronomy, and mathematics is probably due to the more systematic use in these aelds of a shared de- scriptive vocabulary. Geology predominantly uses analogical models while the two other aelds, being more quantitative, use primarily proportional", 
p.31: Normalized relative frequencies of uses of each type of analogy by research field: Math with 42 analogies uses 4.2 proportional as the most., Physics with 52 analogies uses 2 Model the most., Geology with 3x 0 value & 15 analogies uses Model: 3.4.
p.32: "analogies, a type negligible in other aelds. Prediction analogies are re- markably well distributed among the different aelds, except in mathemat- ics where it is not really useful and where the proportional analogies per- form essentially the same function. Its value is also low in physics where models are the dominant type of analogy followed by proportion, since physics tends to be quantitative. Classiacatory analogies are most preva- lent in descriptive sciences like biology and geology and nearly absent in mathematics, as could be expected. One would expect that it would be dominant in more descriptive disciplines like biology or medicine but it is not the case except marginally for geology. The difference between astron- omy and physics can be understood by noting that the necessity to classify new phenomena is relatively less frequent in astronomy than in physics, where a large number of phenomena are not yet mathematized during the period covered here."
; 2023-2024: Hegel, Nietzsche or other 18th-19th-century philosopher: Sciences has maximize empirical data for and minimize reason (in logic).; 2024/philarchive .org/archive/DUNRAO : 
p.3: "While many find the reduction hard to believe owing to its associated ontology, it is nonetheless natural to read Lewis as a realist about modality",
p.4:"Mackie’s error theory is an extreme version of irrealism; more modest versions that are compatible with Existence are possible." (I thought error theory is in contention with Michael Pendlebury.),
p.11: Part of objectivism-chapter: "This line of reasoning suggests that even paradigmatic non-objective domains will satisfy Cognitive Command, and the No Triviality feature is violated. But it is only suggestive, since one crucial assumption is that facts in non-objective domains can be known. We could of course reject this, and endorse Moderate Skepticism for non-objective domains:
Moderate Skepticism Not all of the facts in D are such that someone could know them."..."Whether it is a structural feature of objectivity that Moderate Skepticism is not true of non-objective domains is not a question I will try to answer here. But it is a substantial and non-trivial consequence of Cognitive Command that, if it can satisfy the No Triviality condition, non-objectivity must be accompanied by a degree of skepticism.",
p.14: "Connections: magnetism
We have so far considered some various candidates for the natural kinds that might underly talk of realism and objectivity.", "Many writers, starting with David Lewis (1983), have held that highly fundamental properties have an additional feature: they are easy to refer to."
Personal end-note: Relative Fundamentalism including moderate skepticism with relativism being a mode of "Agrippa's ten modes." "Lewis" is mentioned 5 times.;

Objective realism-note:a

Summary of Pendlebury's objective realism-note:v
[2026.07.10: Realism: 
Realism: philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR .pdf : True-/False-determinant, Reference to "largely mind-independent world". (I assume mind-independent except the minds.),
2025.11.08/philpapers.org/archive/PENOVR.pdf : 
p.2: "largely independent reality3"
ft.3:"I say "largely independent" rather than "independent" tout court to leave room for the possibility of realism about, for example, self-ascriptions of the agent's current mental states.",
p.3:"conception of realism captures most of the philosophical problems that are widely labeled as "realism," and excludes most of their contraries. But it",
p.4: "does not full justice to everyday nonphilosophical usage.12",
p.20: "objectivism is likely to have the broadest appeal, especially mathematics, natural science and everyday empirical judgements about the macro-physical environment", (Mathematical and moral realism doesn't respond to Dummett's challenge well, which that challenge is about the Epistemic Reach, which belongs to objectivism according to Pendlebury, which Common Sense Realism responds to Dummett's challenge well, so I assumed that mathematics is closer to objectivism than realism.),
"Independence Requirement"..."largely independent",
My own research: "Reference to largely mind-independent world, true/false-determinant";
philpapers. org/archive/PENHTB.pdf :  p.6: "realism is apt to encourage unwarranted complacency about objectivity. I think that it cuts the other way. For—as recognized by Kant, whose normative theory was closer to expressivism than to realism—normative realism is not concerned with what is the case but with what is to be done",
p.14: "normative realism", "However, these very benefits suggest that the propositional-guise account does not save expressivism, but sacrifices it to realism. My response to this challenge is two-fold.",
"realism allows only for truth-value indeterminacy that results from such factors as vagueness and presupposition failure.34",

Objectivity: philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR .pdf : 
Objectivism: coherence, mostly able for speakers to grasp, biased towards the topic-subject and the philosophy only, Output Requirement: having a robust primary standard with secondary standards, Grounding requirement: thoughtful, reflective, careful, independent topic-engagers independently agreeing 100%., philpapers.org/archive/PENOVR.pdf : p.4: 
"possibility of objective inquiry that could yield knowledge, and, along with that, opposition to subjectivism, relativism, and skepticism.",
"I will be guided by the assumption that one should be an objectivist about mathematics, modern science, and responsible everyday discourse concerning straightforward matters of fact,13 but an antiobjectivist about mere expressions of feelings (because they make no claim to objectivity) and astrology and creation science (because their standards of correctness are arbitrary). This suggest two",
p.5: key conditions" He rules out subjectivism and relativism first, then "total skepticism".;
My own research:"logical coherence and consistency, Independence from biases, epistemic reach like that everyone in this world can immediately understand this, output as in having a valid primary standard of claims hovering all the secondary standards of claims, and a grounded consensus on diverse, thoughtful, careful, independent-minded, topic-engaged, practiced, rational individuals.";
philpapers. org/archive/PENHTB.pdf : p.5: Normative Objectivity leases room for error., 
p.13: "standards will include general standards of consistency and coherence32, as well as further non-arbitrary standards of correctness that are appropriately responsive to the needs, goals, commitments, identities, and other significant features of the agents in the relevant populations  and to explicitly-mentioned or contextually-determined constraints on what kinds of evaluation, if any, are to be applied."...
"It is crucial to my argument that this judgement itself involves a commitment to the norm even though it also goes beyond this commitment (as implied by my rejection of the deflationary account of correctness).",
p.21: "These remarks still leave me open to the charge that I have not given an informative, non-circular, analytical definition of “correct.” This is true. But I doubt that such a definition is possible.44 We could try to get at the use of the word by summarizing the main points I have mentioned in the slogan “to count a commitment as correct is to have-it-because-one-judges-that-it-satisfies-the-relevant-objective-standards," but I see no way of converting anything like this into a reasonable analytical definition. However, we do not need such a definition in order to recognize that one cannot count a commitment as correct without having it, and therefore that the predicate “correct” is up to the job to which the propositional-guise theorist aligns it."...
"all language, including the most obviously descriptive language, is normative in this sense, because it all involves standards (see. e.g., Pendlebury 1998)."

Objective realism: philpapers.org/archive/PENOVR.pdf : p.10: "At the other extreme, realist objectivists include"..."a recent stage"..."myself on claims about the world around us" Hilary Putnam and Kant on everyday objects. Ft. 45: "Michael Pendlebury, "Perception and Objective Knowledge," The Proceeding of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy, volume 5: Epistemology, ed. Richard Cobb-Stevens (Bowling Green: Philosophy Documentation Center, 2000): 29-38." (",
p.19: "open to knock-down, drag-out proof or disproof—unless it can be undermined on grounds on internal consistency or logical incompatibility with undeniable truths. If it avoid those pitfalls, it should be judged on the basis of the fruitfulness of its application. How well does it allow us to structure and integrate our thinking? Does it distinguish adequately between different kinds of commitments that addresses different concerns? Can it help resolve apparent tensions between our responses to different cases? And so on. And even if the proposal is adopted for some purposes, it should not be treated as sacrosanct, but should be followed only when and to the extent that it is more effective than available alternatives in addressing the sorts of questions that I have mentioned.",
2026.04.16/philpapers. org/archive/PENHTB.pdf : p.1: "A quasi-realist like me stresses the vast extent of the parallel between normative convictions, as they emerge in the theory, and the plainest cases of belief in realistic content. (Gibbard 2003, pp. 180-1)" (Theory here= objectivity. Plainest, realistic beliefs = common sense realism. Since his minimal reason waging the highest probability of a consideration with Pendlebury's fullest commitment, which that commitment is caused by realist determinacy requirement and coherence requirement is inside his anti-objectivist anti-realist interpretation of objective realism and combined probabilistic coherence, it means that Michael Pendlebury's objective realism about the world around us is partly agreed on subjectivists and and objectivists.),
p.9: ft.21:"comparable to the endless hierarchy of different types of belief that was required by and probably sank Russell's “multiple-relation” theory of belief (as advanced in. e.g., Russell 1918/1956, pp. 216-28)—although Russell's hierarchy starts, so to speak, lower down." (A justified infinite regress is when it's infinitely regress to themselves inwards to this Michael Pendlebury.),
philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR.pdf : p.26: "remaining question is whether the Grounding Requirement is satisfied. I claim that it is, because the standards are not arbitrary, but are appropriately connected with the truth of beliefs about the macro-physical environment. In particular, other things being equal, a sensory experience of something's being the case increases the probability that it is the case, and it therefore counts veritistically in favor of the belief that it is. Don't get me wrong. I do not think that judgements of minimal theoretical reasons can be reduced to judgements concerning increases of probability of truth, in part because this would threaten their normative force. I do, however, claim that reasonable, competent, and well-informed judges who recognized that a consideration increased the probability that a belief is true would count the consideration as a minimal theoretical reason for the belief, and that this makes sense given the nature of discourse about theoretical reasons.",
philpapers. org/archive/PENHTB.pdf : p.13: "I am not here suggesting that approval/disapproval semantics " (Approval being approved by logic in this paper.) "could or should be used as a basis for the development of logic of a potentially infinite hierarchy of attitudes of the kind to which standard expressivists are committed—for (again) one of the key attractions of propositional-guise expressivism is that it obviates the need for such hierarchy." (Michael Pendlebury being against potentially infinite regress of standard expressivists's attitudes.),
p.17: "basis of knock-down differences in our intuitive responses to examples"..."reminding ourselves that opposition is an attitude that does not require observable speech or behavior, however minimal, we are likely to find the claim" (It reminds me of 2026.04.24/philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR.pdf : p.19 setting conditions for questioning objective realism with a begging-the-question "And so on.".)

History of objectivity and realism: philpapers. org/archive/PENHTB.pdf : p.22: "It also sits well with the assumption that the distinction between cognitivism and non-cognitivism marks a fundamental divide in metaethics. This divide was once important because of a widespread background assumption that beliefs have realistic contents, i.e., that they represent ways the world might be." (Less certain.) "However, as a result of recent developments in philosophy of psychology, philosophy of language, and metaethics itself, this assumption is no longer sacrosanct, and cognitivism about normative judgements need not involve the metaethical realism that once accompanied it.46 So I think that the distinction between cognitivism and non-cognitivism is no longer fundamental to metaethics.", "This is broad enough to cover all positions that are generally counted as expressivist but also narrow enough, I believe, to exclude positions that are generally counted as realist."
ft.46: "Horgans and Timmons 2006b", "Gibbard 2003";
philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR .pdf : p.26: "special thanks to William Randolph Carter ("Randy"), 1940-2010. for helpful discussions of this and other work."]
summary of Pendlebury's objective realism-note:a

About Michael Pendlebury's objective realism:v
2026.07.10/philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR.pdf : p.1: "Berkeley advocates idealism over realism about material objects in order to avoid skepticism and secure the possibility of objective knowledge. Kant, in the Critique Of Pure Reason, pursues an avowedly antirealist account of the supposed objectivity of synthetic a priori judgements about nature." (Berkeley before attempting to avoid skepticism and after securing the possibility of objective knowledge, at that hypothetical window, and Kant before his Critique Of Pure Reason can be argued to have objective realism about the world around us. I don't know how similar they are to Michael Pendlebury's objective realism. I am guided with the assumption that back then, a realist we're more likely to be an objectivist than in the late 20th century.)
About Michael Pendlebury's objective realism:a

Objective realism side-note:v
Curlie 2026.04.25/pioneer.netserv.chula.ac .th/~hsoraj/web/CT.html : "Hatcher urges us to embrace the realist epistemology and found teaching strategies on it. That is to say, the intellectual standard constitutive of critical thinking is predicated on the belief that truth is objectively 'out there' and is largely accessible (save occasions for fallibility, as Hatcher's 'fallibilistic' realism indicates). We can, conditions permitting, grasp the truth and, as the Greeks say, become one with reality. Hatcher contends that our goals in conducting epistemic activities is first and foremost to find that truth. The teacher's duty, in short, is to help students learn how to seek and grasp truth, how to come ultimately to know the truth which transcends boundaries of language, culture, or locality.";
2026.05.24/doaj .org/article/000a612d549b4b04ac631d523fce518f : "Nevertheless, in perceiving them the body meets barriers which result from physical limitations. There are areas inaccessible for senses, and consequently some aspects of reality remain invisible. This gap in the access to the world is completed by the art. This is what plays a huge role in experiencing human existence, according to Maurice Marleau Ponty. In his book Eye and Mind he states that painting can show what is invisible, and at the same time complete dynamic and ambiguous structure of Being, which consists of: both a man perceived as emboddied consciousness and all what surround them. Within reality understood in this way there is a constant permeation of levels and areas of interaction, and as a result interpretation and creation of new sense." (Art was seen by Charles Murray as peak at around 15th-16th century or so. Maybe it correlates with the emergence of common sense realism in Scotland mid-18th-century and Charles Murray's 1750 with geniuses in objective realism most represented in classical physics and in Charles Murray as "Physics" growing at mid-18th century peaking as lightest at 1689 and more at late-18th century.)
Objective realism side-note:a

Connection between infinite regress and objective realism:v
2025.12.27/philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR.pdf : p.10: "Leibniz on ultimate metaphysical reality; Kant on everyday judgements about nature, Meinongian realists on nonexistent objects, commonsense realist, like Thomas Reid, John McDowell", "Kant is a realist antiobjectivist about judgements of transcendent metaphysics inasmuch he understands them as attempts to describe features of reality about which he thinks human knowledge is impossible." 2025.12.25?-forum: Kant believed in indefinite regress. (Point of contention between relative fundamentalist VS "consideration of however slightly" as competent, unbiased, epistemically possible to reach mostly, self-reflective, thoughtful, distantly opinion-diverse, coherent, consistent, relying on primary standard that has secondary standard used, true/false-deterministic, largely-mind-independent-mind-having-world-believing judges. ->) "With some misgivings, I am inclined to count error theorists as realist antiobjectivists on the subject matter with which they are concerned. Think of"
f.42:"Kant can be difficult to pigeonhole. My phase “everyday judgements about nature” is meant to exclude both synthetic a priori judgements and transcendent judgements about nature (e.g. the judgement that the world has a beginning in time—or its denial)."
p.11: “Hume on "bodies,” Sellers on “manifest image.”"
"Antirealist objectivists include Kant on synthetic a priori judgements"..."so-called “Humeans” on laws of nature, such as David Lewis",
p.14: "As I see it, realistic truth conditions need only be independent of possible evidence in the sense that they do not directly involve, or need not to be formulated as, evidentiary conditions.78 This permits evidence-transcendent truth but does not require it.79 More specifically, it leaves open three different possibilities: first, that all assertions about the subject matter about the relevant subject matter have evidence-transcendent truth conditions; second, that some but not all do; and, third, that none do. Dummett's challenge is greatest in case of first type. The challenge does not arise in cases of the third type. But given the demands of the Determinacy Requirement, it could be difficult to establish that a rich and interesting subject natter actually belong to this type. Cases of the second type always involve a class of assertions that are taken to be verifiable in the sense that their truth conditions do not transcend all possible evidence. In favorable instances, the core of verifiable assertions could provide the basis for an adequate response to Dummett's challenge."
f.74:"I don't know whether Dummett himself uses the phase “evidence-transcendent” or any of his cognates, but they are persuasive in discussions of his work (see e.g., Wright [1992]: 4 and Hale [1997]: 275) and are warranted by Dummett's ([1976]: 52) observation that “the truth of many sentences of our languages appears to transcend our powers of recognition.”
f.77:"This qualification is necessary because Dummett ([1993]: 472-73) has claimed that although he has been seen as a global antirealist, he has never committed to this position.
f.78: "Thus, verificationists, who reject evidence-independent truth, are antirealist objectivists, but not all antirealist objectivists are verificationists."
f.79: "In this paragraph and the next, I draw significantly on Pendlebury (2000): 31–32.";
2025.12.27/philpapers .org/rec/PENPAO : "sophisticated commonsense realism, proposes an account in terms of which perceptions acquire the status of perceptual judgments to the extent that they are imbedded in and engaged with the high-level patterns of consciousness and reasoning characteristic of judgments."..."explains how the contents of perceptual judgments which are to be understood as refinements of contents of the relevant perceptions apply to a world that is largely independent of the perceiver and knower";
2025.12.27/bu .edu/wcp/IntroV5.htm : "He contends, however, that on any account the epistemology of experience requires at least one conscious state that is genuinely relational and to which we have unproblematic access."..."We do however enjoy unproblematic access to sense data. Hence our direct awareness of sense experience is the only genuinely relational awareness that "includes within itself one of its relata." This awareness eliminates the specter of an infinite regress in the process of justification. To this argument one might object that the notion of sense data seems to a hybrid concept that conflates descriptive and explanatory motifs. If we limit ourselves to description of our experience, it seems that we are in fact simply not aware of sense data. We are aware of pained bodily parts and red things but not of pain or red tout court. Michael Pendlebury contends that the development of a sophisticated common sense realism requires an account of how perceptions become perceptual judgments "to the extent that they are imbedded in and engaged with the high level patterns of consciousness and reasoning characteristic of judgments." He rightly points out that whatever may be the relations between concepts in a conceptual system the applicability of concepts must be "anchored" in the nonconceptual aspects of perceptual experience. Human perceptions always blend conceptual and nonconceptual aspects. To the extent that they include conceptual aspects perceptions are raised into what Wilfred Sellars called "the space of reasons" and thus become perceptual judgments. Pendlebury develops a convincing account of how perceptual discriminations both found and merge with conceptual articulations.",
"There is no neat set of criteria according to which common sense divides the matter in the world into objects. Hirsch concludes that we ought to give up on the absolutist project of a general semantic applicable to any language whatsoever. Indeed, we must accept the doctrine of conceptual relativism if we are "to accept our common sense ontological judgments at face value-to accept them for the humble, vague, messy, but strictly and objectively true judgments they are . . . ." Peter Klein takes his point of departure from a Pyrrhonian text which suggests that there are typically three forms of reasoning employed to justify beliefs: foundationalism, coherentism and infinitism. He then develops the thesis that only infinitism ("the view that adequate reasons for our beliefs are infinite and non-repeating") avoids the circular reasoning characteristic of coherentism and the arbitrariness characteristic of foundationalism. Infinitism holds that all of our justifications are provisional. There are always further questions that could be asked. As Klein puts it wryly: "The fun of reasoning is never exhausted." This does not mean that there can be no progress in truth. In fact, scientific practice thrives on the new questions generated by provisional answers. Paul Moser takes a different but related approach to the challenge of Pyrrhoniam skepticism. He considers the skeptical claim that non-skeptics invariably introduce question-begging warrants for their beliefs. Philosophers have traditionally called upon some epistemological warrant "such as science, common sense, intuition, explanatory coherence, social consensus, or utility of some sort." In every case, however, skeptics are able to discern some way in which the appeal to an authoritative warrant relies on a circular argument. After rejecting the standard response that the skeptical challenge is itself question-begging, Moser develops the thesis that "the best we can do is to invoke a kind of instrumental epistemic rationality that doesn't pretend to escape evidential circularity." He adds that skepticism cannot show that its "risk-averse strategy" provides a more effective way or avoiding error and it certainly cannot provide a way of advancing in truth. The modest tone of many of these essays reminds me of William James' hopeful but similarly modest remarks about the possibility of progress in truth. According to James, there is always a certain arbitrariness about an individual's decision about when to cease questioning" (Common sense being against non-arbitrary standard of correctness and infinite regress.) ", but we must eventually stop somewhere and take our rest in some reasonable conviction." (Michael Pendlebury's consideration in favor of assertions with minimal reasons being overthrown anytime as however slightly.) "The philosopher is committed, however, to the view that such moments are provisional resting places." (Assertions based on minimal reasons.) "Philosophy's role is ever to seek alternatives and to criticize comfortable conclusions. The pleasure of reasoning is never exhausted." (End of this website, which Michael Pendlebury contributed in with his common sense realism, which I guess can't see infinite regress, yet others might do. At least one of Michael Pendlebury's somewhere where I can't find it right now or in another of his pdf claims that maybe of his "Objectivism versus Realism".pdf in 2025.12.27/philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR .pdf or somewhere is that we should be careful about reasoning, which resonates with Peter Klein's statements about his Infinitism. Yet Michael Pendlebury's unclearly explained grounding requirement and him pointing out that despite advances in epistemology and similar ilk, we still didn't reached an adequate general account of sufficiently justifications nor necessitated requirements of reasons in Pendlebury's sense implies that there's no end in sight. My interpretation is that contemporary classical physics might be satisfy common sense realism closer to realist camp, scientific realism closer to objectivism camp, and provisional from bu .edu's Infinitism being temporary.
p.25: "Theoretical reasons are veritistic considerations in favor of beliefs—in other words, considerations that count in favor of those beliefs being true" relates to p.14: f.48 about the value of verification. );
2025.12.27/chass.ncsu .edu/people/mjpendle/ : Pendlebury's increased interest in the transcendental idealist Immanuel Kant and the transcendence : "Imaginative Synthesis and the Basic Function of the Second Part of Kant’s Transcendental Deduction in B,” forthcoming in European Journal of Philosophy. “Kant’s Account of Our Representation of Space: The Form of Intuition, Synthesis, and the Formal Intuition,” forthcoming in Kant Yearbook 17 (2025): Kant’s Philosophy of Mind Making Sense of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Philosophical Introduction, London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2022."
Connection between infinite regress and objective realism:a

Response to Michael Pendlebury to Infinitism being semi-valid:v
2025.12.21/plato.stanford .edu/archives/win2025/entries/infinite-regress/ : Infinitely indivisible: "Since classical mereology guarantees that there is a biggest thing—the thing that has all else as proper parts—but it does not guarantee that there are any smallest things—things that have no proper parts",
2025.12.21/philosophy.stackexchange .com/questions/130748/why-do-some-reject-infinite-regresses : "And in our day, it appears to be roughly acceptable to the community of analytic philosophers to consider the notion of ever-divisible "gunk" (in mereology)."",
Pendlebury's objective realist Leibniz and relativism in foundational relativism supports infinitely regress of descending chain of ontological dependence from top to bottom: 2025.12.21/plato.stanford .edu/archives/win2025/entries/infinite-regress/ : "things that have no proper parts—it guarantees that if parts are dependent on the wholes of which they are parts then there will be a first, ontologically fundamental, element, whereas if wholes are dependent on their parts then there is the possibility of an infinite regress in which each thing is dependent on some further thing(s), with nothing being fundamental: a possibility in which, Schaffer (2010, 62) says (agreeing with Leibniz), “Being would be infinitely deferred, never achieved”. Leibniz and Schaffer advocate Metaphysical Foundationalism: the view that there have to be some things that are absolutely fundamental—dependent on nothing—on which all else ultimately depends.",",
2025.12.21/philosophy.stackexchange .com/questions/130748/why-do-some-reject-infinite-regresses : "Contra Leibniz and Schaffer, then, Bliss rejects the idea that in an infinitely descending chain of ontological dependence, being would never be achieved.",
maybe 2025.12.22/storage.googleapis .com/production-ipage-v1-0-2/032/498032/zDYqEAjc/d1cb4766e1654f21b565dffb7c7f20fc?fileName=Infinitism-Korosh%20Erfani .pdf because contradicting claims about Kant and infinite regress : 
p.332: "saw how a causal chain that is deemed to go until the annihilation of life on earth could also lead to other better outcomes if we change the equation and implement new links in this chain of events.",
Leibniz and infinitism: 2025.12.22/etools .ch: 2025.12.22/jstor .org/stable/45410601 : "idea of biological infinitism is linked to three central prob- lems related to Leibniz's understanding of natural world: (1) t…"
Pendlebury's sophisticated common sense realism doesn't accept infinite regress: ""infinite regress logical argument is naturally rejected when applied to ontology, used to make ontological claims, because we have no empirical experience and observations of infinity."",
""Kant held that the causal regress is neither finite nor infinite (in some sense of those terms) but is rather "indefinite."",
Pendlebury's Objectivism and Infinitism: 2025.12.21/plato.stanford .edu/archives/win2025/entries/infinite-regress/ :  ""From a purely mathematical standpoint, infinite series or regresses are not inherently paradoxical or illogical. They are features of well-defined formal systems, suggesting that any philosophical objection to them must be based on grounds other than pure logical incoherence."",
Pendlebury's objective realism and Infinitism: ""physical sense, it seems perfectly logical to accept an infinite casual chain."", ""mathematicians have worked out both bi-infinite and cyclical logical systems (non-well-founded set theory, for example) and these do work.", "mathematical view of infinite: the integers ...,-2-1,0,1,2... han no "beginning", and the "rational" view about proof/argument: an argument must have a starting point."",
Hume and Infinitism: 2025.12.22/iep.utm .edu/inf-epis/ : ""Setting aside an evaluation of the steps in Hume‘s argument for foundationalism, notice that he too simply discards infinitism with the stroke of a pen: “But as you cannot proceed in this manner in infinitum …”. To Hume, infinitism seemed so obviously mistaken that no argument against it was needed.";
2025.12.22/academia .edu/93497004/The_Resilience_of_Formal_Infinitism_Through_Puzzles_and_Paradoxes : "Is infinity possible, or inescapably problematic? The advancement of commerce, agriculture, engineering, physics, and the life sciences all rely on classical continuous mathematics that incontrovertibly assumes the possibility of the infinite, and yet infinity leads to paradoxes.,
Enlightened Philosophers and Infinitism: 2025.12.22/degruyterbrill .com/document/doi/10.1515/kant-2020-0040/html : "Wolff’s relation to Leibniz and Kant’s relation to both are notoriously vexed questions. First, this paper argues that Wolff’s most serious departure from Leibniz consists in his (so far overlooked) rejection of the latter’s infinitism. Second, it contends that the controversies that surrounded Wolff’s early acceptance of infinite causal regress and prompted his conversion to finitism played a prominent role in shaping the theses of Kant’s Antinomies. Whereas Leibniz and the early Wolff considered infinite regress to provide support for the contingency of the world and the existence of God, Wolff’s enemies condemned it as Spinozistic. After Wolff, the claim that an infinite chain of causes is impossible became the standard view among both Wolffian and anti-Wolffian metaphysicians."
Transcendence and related to enlightened philosophers: 2025.12.22/philosophy.stackexchange .com/questions/12761/deleuzian-finitism-and-spinozian-infinitism : "transcendental, seems here to be that beyond the universe, and having no connection with it; whereas making the world immanent in a neccessary substance, as Spinoza did, appears to be here Deluzes reason to regard his theory anti-transcendetal.", (Spinoza as transcendental its is closer to being infinitist.) "He equates this infinite substance with God - all extension is the extension of God, thus the equation signaled by the phrase, “God, or nature.”", "I don't know Deleuze well but I get the sense that he would have condoned a conception of the infinite as (potentially) infinite differentiation.", (Rejecting Infinitism in regards to perceptual discrimination.)
"suggesting that infinite modes could represent a kind of transcendence. It would not be the sort of transcendence which Deleuze is separating himself from here, however. (Even the appealingly finitist Deluze accepts infinite regress as one kind of transcendence.) Many things, according to Spinoza, are beyond the capacities of a finite creature like the individual human.;
2025.12.22/iep.utm .edu/gilles-deleuze/#SH3d : "key word throughout Deleuze’s writings, as we have seen, to be found in almost all of his main texts without fail, is immanence. This term refers to a philosophy based around the empirical real, the flux of existence which has no transcendental level or inherent seperation." (Deluze appealing to empiricism/simple common sense realism to deny transcendent.), "all thought, in order to have any real force, must not work by setting up trancendentals, but by creating movement and consequences"",
2025.12.22/theologyphilosophycentre .co .uk/papers/Milbank_StantonLecture4.pdf : p.1: "Finitism or infinitism; Kant or Spinoza. However, a finitistic perspective is often divided between the insistence that the finite is all that we can know and an abyssal respect for an infinite that we do not know. This unknown infinite may even assume priority within the overall organisation of a theoretically finitistic philosophy. It tends to be construed as transcendent rather than immanent in part because it is projected as ‘beyond’ all understanding of phenomena by an epistemological perspective, and partly because it is seen as impinging, in excess of theoretical understanding, upon the inner core of our individual being from a ‘height’ that prevents any subordination of the individual to a pantheistic totality. Nevertheless, this mode of transcendence can often seem quite equivocal, and indistinguishable from an alternative mode of immanence, as we shall see." (Theoretical finitist's transcendence in perspective of phenomena as in Pendlebury's perceptual discrimination and assuming that Pendlebury's non-arbitrary standard of correctness/objectivism also is included in "excess of theoretical understanding, upon the inner core of our individual being from a ‘height’ that prevents any subordination of the individual to a pantheistic totality" is seemingly indistinguishable and equivocal from alternative infinite regress.),
p.2: "It follows then that the modern idiom of transcendence involves an unmediated dualistic split between the finite and the infinite, rendering it at once finitistic and infinitistic. This duality traces back once more to Duns Scotus, though clearly we need to understand here that Scotus was only consummating certain tendencies that preceded him. Scotus’s linked ideas of univocity of being and knowledge as representation tended to ensure that our theoretical knowledge is complete when it is merely of known finite things taken without reference to their infinite creative source. Hence in knowing finite existence or finite truth I fully know being and truth as such. On the other hand, univocity of being was also taken by Scotus to imply the priority of the infinite. It is infinite and not finite being which is self-sufficient and he deploys this conclusion to shape a proof for God’s existence. Accordingly, infinity is for Scotus the primary property of the divine, whereas for Aquinas it was simplicity."..."Scotus ‘infinity’ is primary not just ontologically, but also logically and semantically, given that the thesis of the univocity of being is a ‘transcendental’ affirmation that hovers between the semantic and the ontological.",
p.4: "In different ways both Descartes and Kant inherited this unmediated Scotist duality. For Descartes our theoretical knowledge is, on the one hand, finitely confined to the cogito , or immediacy of self-awareness in all we feel and think and do, and we must doubt all else. On the other hand it also includes a certainty of the infinite as positively ‘clear and distinct’ and in the light of this uncertainty we are able to remove our doubts about the existence and nature of the world outside us."..."For Kant, by contrast, our theoretical knowledge is wholly confined to appearances and yet one has an ethical access to the infinite that effectively cancels his metaphysical agnosticism, because the divine and the religious are so absolutely identified with the ethical imperative that we can comprehend. Moreover, in complex ways that were taken yet further by Fichte and some of the neo-Kantians, Kant effectively derives theoretical understanding and phenomenal reality from ethical understanding and noumenal reality. The analytic philosopher John Hare rightly recognises a Scotist substructure as present in all this and even claims, with daring counter-intuition, that Kant, apparently the inventor of an autonomous human morality, in fact perpetuates Scotist divine command theory in the ethical realm. One can argue this because, Kant stresses that, on account of",
p.5: "a lurking sensory schematisation which even moral reflection can never escape -- the aesthetic experience of the ‘sublime’ -- we need ‘faith’ that the categorical imperative is real in the infinite God, such that every pure and autonomous human ethical will is only a kind of aspiration"
Response to Michael Pendlebury about Infinitism being semi-valid:a

Difference between skepticism and infinite regress:v
2025.12.27/dl.libcats .org/genesis/774000/d1dc9de552052f624b3ab501aa7ea91b/_as/%5BJonathan_Dancy%2C_Ernest_Sosa%2C_Matthias_Steup_%28Edit%28libcats .org%29.pdf : p.48: "epistemic regress problem": "There are four epistemological theo- ries, corresponding to these possibilities:
(i) Foundationalism holds that, when one has a justified belief, this belief either is itself non-inferentially justified or is based, directly or indirectly, on one or more non-inferentially justified beliefs. A belief is non-inferentially justified if it is justified to some degree in some way that does not depend on one’s having reasons for the belief.3
(ii) Coherentism holds that all justified beliefs are justified by virtue of the way they fit together with (“cohere with”) the rest of one’s belief system. This view is commonly interpreted as embracing the legitimacy of circular series of reasons.4
(iii) Infinitism holds that, when one has a justified belief, there is an infinite series of reasons supporting it.5
(iv) Skepticism holds that there are no justified beliefs.6"
Difference between skepticism and infinite regress:a

Infinitism to classical physics-note:v
2026.01.13/ Edward McKinnon: Interpreting Physics: p.84: "Postulate I. Grant that two quantities, whose difference is an infinitely small quantity, may be indifferently used for each other: or (which is the same thing) that a quantity which is increased or decreased only by an infinitely small quantity, may be considered as remaining the same.
Marquise d l’Hospital, Analyse (1696)"
Infinitism to classical physics-note:a

Objective realism related-note:v
2026.01.01/cambridge .org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/9EE2044CDA598BD815349912E61189D8/S104909652300063Xa.pdf/measuring-democratic-backsliding.pdf : p.1: "survey objective indicators of democ- racy. For theoretical and pragmatic reasons, we adopt a “quasi- minimalist” conception of democracy that centers on the presence of free and fair elections in which losers accept the results, and we focus our empirical analysis on indicators of electoral competitive- ness."
Objective realism related-note:a

Realism-note:v
2025.08.03/jstor. org/stable/2107233 : Anti-realism was mostly ignored. Dummert focused on partial anti-realism. "Realism is the thesis that reality determines the truth values of sentences. It does so, moreover, independently of speaker and possible knowledge. According to realists, sentences have "objective truth conditions.";
2026.02.08/baijiahao.baidu .com/s?id=1664189081110998553&wfr=spider&for=pc&searchword=%22開明的反現實主義%22 : Google Translate: "According to the principles of realism, the relationship between the writer and life is one of reflection and being reflected, not an equal "dialogue" between two opposing sides."..."So, is realism "outdated" and "obsolete"? If we examine the history of Chinese and foreign literature, we will conclude that realism is timeless and possesses eternal vitality.", "Realism emerged as a literary movement in France in 1826, and Balzac's novel *The Chouans* in 1829 marked the first step in realist writing. However, its origins can be traced back to ancient Greece and Rome. For example, the "representation theory" proposed by ancient Greek philosophers such as Heraclitus, Plato, and Aristotle is the earliest blueprint for realism. In the development of European literature, realism reached its most conscious and mature stage in the mid-19th century, producing great realist writers such as Flaubert and Tolstoy. Although realism lost its mainstream status in the 20th century, being replaced by modernism and postmodernism, it still exists.", "While numerous modernist and postmodernist movements exist, many are as short-lived as realism. In China, from the *Classic of Poetry* to *Dream of the Red Chamber*, to Lu Xun, and then to the "Red Classics," the tradition of realism has been consistently present. Other creative methods, while having their own social contexts and conditions of existence, are only suitable for specific historical periods, while realism is applicable to any era, nation, and country in human society."..."
Secondly, realist literature helps people correctly understand and comprehend social life. Realism adheres to Marxist epistemology, believing that objective existence determines subjective consciousness and emphasizing that subjective consciousness must conform to objective reality. It stresses the importance of grasping the mainstream and essence of problems, discovering the hidden internal connections of things, and avoiding being misled or deceived by chaotic surface phenomena, thereby achieving essential truth rather than superficial truth, and holistic truth rather than partial truth. The core of realist literature is "typification." Engels, in a letter to Harkners, pointed out: "Realism means, in addition to the truthfulness of details, the truthfulness of typical characters in typical environments."", "Therefore, essence is a dialectical unity of "one" and "many." Because the same essence can be manifested in countless phenomena, typical characters are also diverse; there is not only one type in a given era. Therefore, realism does not lead to conceptualization, simplification, or oversimplification.", "Looking at modernism and postmodernism, due to limitations and one-sidedness in their understanding, they led to agnosticism and historical nihilism, believing the world to be nihilistic, absurd, irrational, and fragmented, thus requiring deconstruction. This resulted in contradictory statements in their writing, advocating a complete rejection of tradition, and focusing on describing human alienation, suffering, hopelessness, helplessness, fear, and insignificance under the oppression of technological rationality. Postmodernism is even more one-sided and extreme than modernism.", "Thirdly, the vitality of realism also lies in its dynamic and open characteristics. The essence of realism is to focus on reality, which is not static but dynamic and evolving." Source: Hebei Daily, Author: Feng Qiuchang;
2026.02.12/d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront .net/56081277/Latest_Review_by_Michael_Tavuzzi__Journal_of_Ecclesiastical_History_691__January_2018_p._156-157-libre.pdf?1521242107=&response-content-disposition=attachment%3B+filename%3DBook_Review_Michael_Tavuzzi_in_Journal_o.pdf&Expires=1770909593&Signature=ZMxsvGqalLsYkP80UpvllVthEWVq~sHwmjndBK262y88xDfbQHjRzbqO40lnJ9AML2wNRdSbGlQJivAbUUQD3aLz~kPjiGBuNhBWBh9CikhMbHmzJ9Wy3sjErSWnwLD4c95hCaNESTvyTSjYCwkrZgvIoo2fiJv98nGao89eRutZGKGV2BzqOXy9aHh6lfK27ZXTiMxctLI8zcy9LeAWhYl4m74mlSC9RUNerhsc3CKOXXUEURc3vL2TE5uIaAzA5hw7oRBx0cioQeR4GDsgrXGysvbH1aJxpT~vsRjTEAOm~PUdL4utUNMtIqGrMHrru9Lm1eczZaQ46VSGq3FwDw__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA : p.1: "popular imagination of Renaissance Italy"..."reality was probably far more prosaic and even dismal";

Realism-note:a

Agnosticism-note:v
2026.02.10/baike.baidu .com/item/不可知论/512326 : "Agnosticism, as opposed to cognitivism, is a philosophical epistemology that holds that the world itself cannot be known beyond sensation or phenomena. It was first proposed by the British biologist T.H. Huxley in 1869.", "In modern Western philosophy, many schools of thought use agnosticism to deny the objectivity of scientific truth. It is a philosophical theory that denies the possibility of knowing the world or the possibility of completely knowing the world.", "elements of agnostic thought existed as early as ancient skepticism, but it emerged as a systematic philosophical theory in 18th-century Europe. The exploration and research of the opposing relationships between substance and accident, essence and phenomenon, necessity and contingency—which have existed in European philosophy since ancient times—remained unresolved within the realm of metaphysics for a long time.", "In the 18th century, natural science was underdeveloped, and knowledge about natural phenomena was fragmented. Scientific answers to the essence and causes of many things and phenomena could not be provided, prompting some philosophers to hypothesize the existence of an unknowable thing-in-itself behind things.
D. Hume was one of the main representatives of modern European agnosticism. He pointed out that knowledge is entirely limited to the realm of experience; humans cannot perceive or prove the existence of material entities, nor can they perceive or prove the existence of spiritual entities (including religion).
Another important representative of modern European agnosticism was Kant. He affirmed the existence of the thing-in-itself, but pointed out that the original appearance of the thing-in-itself, which stimulates people's senses and causes sensations, is unknowable; the soul as the most complete unity of all spiritual phenomena, the world as the most complete unity of all physical phenomena, and religion as the highest unity are not objects of knowledge, but belong to the realm of faith."..."
Some natural scientists who philosophically adhered to the agnosticism of Hume and Kant, such as Huxley and H.L.F. von Helmholtz, acknowledged that nature is governed by objective laws and did not accept any external interference. Therefore, Engels pointed out that their agnosticism was "realistic" materialism." (Agnosticism might be realistic materialism.)..."
In modern Western philosophy, many agnostic schools deny the objective significance of scientific truth, upholding agnosticism. Positivists such as H. Spencer and A. Comte were Humees. Neo-Kantianism strongly advocates Kant's agnosticism. Machism, pragmatism, neo-positivism, existentialism, and other schools all uphold agnosticism as a means of criticizing materialism.", "Agnosticism argues that sensation is a barrier separating consciousness from the external world, using the relativity of the limits of human cognition to demonstrate the absolute limits of human cognitive abilities, and therefore contradicts dialectical materialism."..."Dialectical materialism points out that the development of natural science and social practice constantly proves that human cognitive abilities are infinite, that human cognition can correspond to objective reality, and that there are only things yet to be known in the world, not unknowable realms." (Infinitism fitting to objective realism.) , "in France and other Protestant countries, philosophy gained dominance in the 18th century. In Marx's view, Deism was very similar to agnosticism; both were convenient ways to discard old dogmas. The French Revolution, which brought about significant but superficial changes, shocked the upper classes, who formed open alliances with the various denominations revived in the turmoil of 1848", "According to Engels, educated foreigners who immigrated to England in the mid-19th century were astonished by the religious fascination they witnessed among the middle class; the influence of various countries had arrived, producing what he called an effect of “enlightenment.”", "In 1892, Engels wrote that agnosticism was almost as revered as the Church of England, and far superior to the Messiah; in a succinct Langkashire term, agnosticism was “shy” materialism (see *Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 3, p. 386). Engels went on to discuss the philosophical significance of agnosticism’s uncertainty about the reality of things or causal relationships.", "**Strong Agnosticism:** The question of whether God exists is inherently unknowable, and humanity lacks the ability to draw conclusions based on so-called evidence.
**Weak Agnosticism:** The question of whether God exists has no answer, but it is not entirely impossible to reach a conclusion. People should not make hasty judgments before more evidence is available."..."**Modern Agnosticism:** Philosophical and metaphysical questions cannot be proven or disproven. Rational thinking can model meaningful assumptions within them. This school of agnosticism does not focus on discussing the existence of God.", "Although the basic tenets of agnosticism are as old as skepticism, Huxley coined the terms "agnostic" and "agnosticism" specifically to summarize his views on contemporary metaphysics, particularly the new developments of unconditionalism (Hamilton) and unknowability (Herbert Spencer).", "More than three hundred years ago, scientific progress, especially in physics, seemed to suggest to humanity that there are no unknowable things, only things that have not been known. Of course, at that time, a truly complete scientific research system was only just beginning to take shape, and drawing such a conclusion was obviously premature.
"..."Numerous scientific facts clearly point to: "The world is unknowable."
"..."Firstly, the uncertainty principle. This theory states that we cannot simultaneously and precisely measure the position and momentum of a particle. Don't forget, the world is only "knowable" if it is completely knowable."...
"Secondly, Gödel's theorem. This theorem states that in any formal system containing natural numbers, there must be undecidable propositions. This should at least demonstrate that, theoretically, the world is unknowable, and therefore the entire world is unknowable."...
"Thirdly, regarding the relationship between observation and existence. This is essentially the same as the first point. Schrödinger's quantum cat, if not observed, is in a state of neither life nor death. This is a description of the microscopic world by quantum mechanics (the quantum cat's observation object is uranium atoms, not the cat itself, so it's considered microscopic). Extending this to macroscopic objects, this effect is very small, not zero. This echoes the view of the ancient Chinese philosopher Wang Shouren: "Before you see this flower, it and you are both in a state of stillness; when you see it, its color suddenly becomes clear, and you know that this flower is not outside your mind."", "Related to Agnosticism: There is a famous "delayed-delay experiment" in physics, where a photon is allowed to take two possible paths, and the specific path it takes is decided afterward.", "Therefore, the objectivity of the world's existence is indeed questionable."..."
This is somewhat of an attack on materialism. Materialism itself claims that science must be combined with experimentation; if experimental results contradict it, it cannot be ruled out that it will be contradicting itself. Of course, this viewpoint has significant flaws:"..."
First, quantum mechanics must be correct. It hasn't been applied macroscopically, only experimentally verified microscopically. If quantum effects were applied to macroscopic objects, the deviation from acknowledging the objective existence of the world would be extremely small. Such a small spacetime would be practically meaningless."..."
Second, quantum mechanics arrives at this result because it uses a different way of describing the world. Which is correct: describing the world using conventional methods and then adding a "quantum parameter" to correct it? It's simply a matter of which is more convenient; a simpler mathematical process and a more perfect physical explanation are chosen."..."
Fourth, the problem of "why." "In the process of understanding nature, we raise many 'whys,' and when you try to answer one 'why,' you haven't completely answered it, but merely reduced the question to another 'why,' usually the latter being more credible or more difficult to answer. And this process can continue, forming a chain of 'whys.'" (Confirming Infinitism.) "..."
This inevitably means that at least one 'why' is unexplainable."...
"Fifth, physics is not absolute." (Against fundamentalism.) "Our understanding of physical theories is more of a conjecture than a knowledge. Besides propositions in mathematical logic that can be both proven and disproven, there are three other types of propositions: those that can be proven and disproven, such as "a disaster will occur here"; those that cannot be proven but can be disproven, such as "no one can climb this mountain"; and those that cannot be proven or disproven, such as "pi has an infinite number of zero decimal places." Unfortunately, all physical laws are propositions that cannot be absolute but can be disproven. (Physical laws are uncertain and confirms agnosticism.) "We can never be certain that they are always true; they can be overturned by counterexamples at any time." (Confirms Infinitism.) "Instead of saying "practice confirms theory," we should say "practice disproves theory." Such theories are more of hypotheses than knowledge. Idealism might avoid this problem, but it still cannot escape unknowability or detachment from objective facts."..."
In fact, there are propositions that can be proven but not disproven." (Reverse agnosticism/Cognitivism.) "For example, the disease cerebral thrombosis exists. It's meaningless to find thousands of healthy people without cerebral thrombosis to disprove it, but finding one patient with cerebral thrombosis proves it is indeed possible. This is called a particular argument. Regarding physical laws, Du Heng-Quinn argues that, quite the opposite, because the boundary conditions are completely unknown, they are impossible to falsify." (Physical laws seems to confirm modern agnosticism.),
"there is also a Bayesian approach, which holds that hypotheses with more proofs are more credible, and hypotheses with fewer proofs are less credible, but it's possible for hypotheses to have a degree of neither 100% nor 0% credibility. Under this line of thinking, all physical laws are those with relatively high numbers and strength of proofs, and it's impossible for a single falsification to overturn their perceived credibility. Therefore, the world is probabilistically reliable and relatively knowable, but this probability may never reach 100%..."..."
Sixth, we can never be certain that the information we receive from the outside world is true, which is essentially the same as point five.",
"You can never be certain that what you see is real; it's merely guesswork based on experience."..."
Seventh, we lack the informational foundation to fully understand the world. The process of understanding something (knowledge-based understanding) is merely storing information about that thing in the brain, which is impossible for the entire universe. Because the total number of particles in the entire universe is likely greater than the number in our brains, and our memory information cannot possibly exceed the information in our brains, it is impossible to store all the information of the entire universe into the brain, and therefore impossible to understand the entire universe."..."
In conclusion, "the world is unknowable."",
"People often understand ontology as the structural and genetic origin of the world." (Widespread belief.) "This interpretation fails to recognize the significance of Aristotle's change in the formulation of the ontological question.
"..."Aristotle was not asking what the form of things is in a genetic sense. As he pointed out, the so-called substance (form) is the fundamental characteristic that makes a thing what it is. Therefore, when Aristotle inquired about the "origin," he was not considering "what are the ultimate elements constituting things," but rather another question: Why is a thing or a class of things the way it is? For example, why is a table or a tree a table or a tree, and not something else?", Aristotle knew this distinction before. "This approach to questioning reveals that ancient Greek philosophers recognized a significant difference between the world perceived by people and the world grasped by reason: the former is unpredictable and ever-changing, while the latter is knowable and comprehensible; the former is unreal and unreliable, while the latter is real and reliable. In everyday language, the phenomenal world we see is not the original, essential world.", "This awareness of the ancient Greeks",
"this task is human reason (i.e., intellect); the capacity of reason is absolutely infinite, with nothing it cannot know, not even "God" (Virtuous Infinite progress and early modern philosophers's confidence of reason.) "; reason best embodies the essential power of humanity, therefore, intellectual activity (i.e., scientific cognitive activity) represents the entire meaning of human existence. Modern philosophers, whether empiricists or rationalists, did not differ substantially in these basic postulates.",
"People often view the epistemological questions raised by modern philosophers from the perspective of empirical science, understanding their discussions on the origin of knowledge, the nature of ideas, the role of universal categories, the classification of knowledge, and the limitations of knowledge as descriptive statements about the characteristics and essence of actual cognitive activities and existing scientific knowledge." (Widespread belief) ..."
This leads to misunderstandings about the significance of philosophers' thinking.",
""For example, people criticize rationalism for acknowledging "innate ideas" as advocating that humans possess empirical knowledge not derived from experience. This is precisely a misunderstanding."..."
Because, in fact, rationalists are not raising the question of whether humans can acquire knowledge about the external world apart from "sensory activity," but rather another, deeper, and more acute philosophical question: what is the significance of "innate ideas" (universal, general cognitive categories) in constructing knowledge? Besides sensory activity, what conditions are needed to construct universally necessary, truthful knowledge?"..."
Therefore, we can propose a new research perspective as a horizon for analyzing the value of agnosticism. In other words, philosophical epistemology is not concerned with questions such as "how actual cognitive activities are carried out," which belong to the sciences of thinking, such as psychology. Philosophical epistemology is concerned with the theoretical foundations of how knowledge is possible; its analysis is an analysis of the logical preconditions necessary for constructing knowledge. Only by examining the logical meaning of the modern philosophical concept of "entity" from this perspective can we escape the predicament caused by empirically scientific questioning of "entity"" (Escaping agnosticism?) "and establish a better entry point for evaluating agnosticism.", "In modern philosophical epistemology, the problem of agnosticism does not involve the empirical world or the world of lived experience, but only objects beyond sensory experience, objects that can only be grasped or believed through reason or intellect. Philosophers represent this object with the concept of "substance."", "Substance is the carrier or support of the attributes of things; it is a support assumed for the purpose of explaining simple ideas, the reason for which is unknown." ("However slightly" as Michael Pendlebury puts it in his "minimal reason" by Dummett or so.), "Substance is the main attribute (i.e., essence) of things, and this attribute becomes the basis for the other attributes of those things. Substance refers to an active subject; relative to the existence of "things," its activities are proactive and conscious. Substance not only refers to the cognitive subject, but also to the moral (more accurately, ethical) subject capable of creating its own real existence. Substance refers to the absolute unity of phenomenon, empirical self, and truth; it is not an empirical existence, but a priori existence.", "However, whether affirming or denying the existence of an entity, affirming or denying its knowability, its philosophical significance requires specific analysis and cannot be generalized. Furthermore, it needs to be emphasized again that an entity does not refer to the "existence of things" in the empirical world; therefore, it is not an existence of "thing-or-thing (material) nature." Therefore, we cannot use empirical (or natural science) concepts to refer to or understand the concept of entity, such as using empirical concepts of space and time to define an entity, saying how much space it occupies or how long it exists. Failure to pay attention to these two principles will lead to many misunderstandings in research.", "people often fully affirm and praise the philosophical concept of "denying the existence of spiritual entities while affirming the existence of material entities," rarely considering the question: why can't we simultaneously acknowledge or deny the existence of both types of entities? If we understand entities in the sense of carriers or supports, then neither material nor spiritual entities exist; if we understand these two concepts of entities in their essential sense, then we can only correctly explain a series of problems in philosophical epistemology by acknowledging their objective reality; "(Philosophical epistemological objective realism denies both materialism and spiritualism with carriers/supporters of attributes of things.) "if we analyze this problem in a subjective sense, then we emphasize human initiative and creativity. In this case, matter, as a passive existence, is placed in a relatively secondary position in philosophical epistemological research." (Materialism is secondary in a time of most philosophical accomplishments till 1950 being measured in Western Europe in year 1750 according to Charles Murray. Another philosopher in philarchive described 18th century in terms of philosophical physics and Lagrange's formulation.)..."
It can be said that the meaningful question is not whether entities actually exist, or whether spiritual entities exist; the valuable question for epistemological research is: what is the significance of acknowledging the existence of entities, and how to define the connotation of entities is meaningful for explaining the possibility of constructing knowledge and for promoting the development of human knowledge. It is precisely because the concept of entity occupies such an important position in philosophical epistemology that modern agnostic philosophers Hume and Kant"(Hume and Kant are categorized as modern agnostics.) "used this as a gap to challenge traditional philosophical concepts.",
"Hume's agnosticism reveals the limitations of human knowledge, and also exposes the limitations of the empiricist method."..."
The core ideas of Hume's agnosticism, or skepticism, can be summarized in three propositions:"..."
(1) There is no a priori synthetic truth about the external world;"..."
(2) All our true knowledge about the external world ultimately comes from perceptual experience;"..."
(3) Only knowledge derived through experimental deduction is correct."..."
These three propositions are supported by two fundamental theories."..."
First, the theory of sensory impressions. Hume believed that the basic object of "knowledge," that is, the object of thought when constructing knowledge, is sensory impressions. All other ideas, such as simple ideas, complex ideas, etc., are based on sensory impressions. An impression refers to the perception of something heard, seen, capable of, loved, hated, desired, or intended. An idea is the perception that the mind becomes aware of when reflecting on the aforementioned sensations or movements." (Hume's idea based on sensory impressions in baidu is common sense/perception in Michael Pendlebury's writings in Objectivism VS Realism and others as my knowledge goes before 2026.) "Based on this, Hume questioned the existence of the material entity, the spiritual entity, and the entity of God as traditionally understood in philosophy." (Hume delegitimizes materialism, spiritualism and traditional religion.) "Furthermore, he argued that since humans cannot acquire sensory impressions of these entities, they cannot acquire knowledge about them." (Sounds like strong agnosticism.) ..."
Secondly, there was the theory of causality. Hume did not entirely agree with his empiricist predecessors. He acknowledged that direct sensory impressions cannot provide universally necessary knowledge, and he also agreed with the rationality of rationalism's approach of using mathematics as a model to seek a path to necessary knowledge. Therefore, he proposed that true knowledge should be acquired by the mind based on impressions and through universal principles. One of the most important principles is causality. When Hume further analyzed our conceptions of causality using the methodological principles of empiricism, he encountered a dilemma: he found that we cannot understand how we acquire concepts of causality through experience. So, how are concepts of causality acquired? Hume attributed it to habitual association.", "According to Hume, the reliability and formation of our knowledge stem from our ability to perceive what can be visualized in our minds; what cannot be visualized can never become our object of cognition." (Strong agnosticism based on extreme empiricism.), "purpose of science is to provide knowledge about the essence and laws of things, helping people understand and master nature. Thus, the conclusions of extreme empiricism conflict greatly with the purpose of natural science: the ultimate conclusion of empiricist argument is that the purpose of science is unattainable. This conflict demonstrates that if one is to uphold the banner of the modern Enlightenment—science and democracy—then continuing to adhere to a thoroughly empiricist stance is neither necessary nor possible.",
"value of Hume's philosophy lies in its conclusion—agnosticism—through a method of skepticism, which awakened people to question metaphysical dogmatism and the concept of God. Hume also limited human knowledge to the realm of empirical activity by defining "unknowable existence," opposing the erroneous view of traditional philosophy, especially rationalism, of infinitely expanding human intellectual capacity." (So rationalism believes in cognitivism, in infinite progress of knowledge. Leibniz and early Wolff argued for vicious infinite regress about the universe continuously and therefore infinitely existing. Leibniz is described by Stanford encyclopedia as the textbook-example of a rationalist. Kant about indefinite regress, supposingky uniting rationalism and empiricism with his late-18th-century works.) "Hume further called for the use of experimental reasoning to study problems in the human sciences and to analyze human nature in a normative manner. Hume also implied that explanations of human morality are superior to reasoned explanations of nature. These ideas of Hume not only played a positive role in the development of natural science but also had a profound influence on the rise of German classical philosophy." (Connection between according to Jonathan Israel moderate enlightened Hume and according to me more romantized and therefore less enlightened late Kant, since enlightenment-ness decreased in late 18th century.),
"Kant, through agnosticism, comprehensively refuted the errors of old metaphysics, propelling modern philosophy's thinking about humanity to a new stage. This involved replacing mechanism with subjectivism, blind rationalism with sober rationalism, and theories of humanity that unified science and ethics with theories that separated the two.

A distinctive feature of Kant's epistemological research is his question about the possibility of knowledge. Kant did not deny that humanity possesses scientific cognitive abilities and can construct objectively valid knowledge. For Kant, this was entirely an empirical fact.

Kant's purpose in proposing agnosticism was to criticize the various fallacies caused by metaphysical dogmatism in philosophical epistemological research, to dispel the transcendental illusions created by old metaphysics, and to study the prerequisites for humanity's ability to construct scientific knowledge from a new perspective. As many philosophical texts have pointed out, a correct understanding of Kant's phenomenal and thing-in-itself doctrines is a prerequisite for a correct understanding of the meaning of Kant's agnosticism.

In Kant's philosophy, the concept of the thing-in-itself has a very rich meaning. This led Kant to a surprising achievement in his philosophical thought that "agnosticism limits the arbitrary use of the concept of the thing-in-itself in philosophical epistemology.""..."
1. The thing-in-itself as the external basis for the possibility of the object of knowledge."..."
In Kant's philosophy, the object of knowledge has three meanings:"..."
First, it refers to the object of understanding, that is, the manifold phenomena provided to the intellect by sensible intuition.",
"Second, it refers to the object of sensible intuition, that is, what the senses obtain under external stimulation.",
"Third, it refers to the object of the senses."..."
Of these three meanings, the first two refer to "the object of thought within consciousness," while the last refers to an independent existence outside of consciousness (the thing-in-itself).",
"The thing-in-itself is unknowable when it does not relate to the senses; however, once it relates to the senses, it is no longer independent and immediately transforms into the second meaning of the object of knowledge, that is, what people usually call "phenomena" (also translated as appearance or manifestation).

Kant considered the forms of sensible intuition and the categories of understanding as the objects of knowledge and the subjective conditions that make knowledge possible, emphasizing that beings that do not or cannot present their own existence in consciousness (intuition) cannot become objects of knowledge. However, limited to these analyses, Kant's argument did not go beyond the scope of "subjective consciousness." This inevitably raises the question of how knowledge can possess objectivity.

To distinguish itself from Berkeleyan subjectivism, Kant further proposed that human cognitive consciousness is limited by external objects. He posited the thing-in-itself, external to the senses, as the external condition that makes "sensation" possible, and thus, the external condition that makes the object of knowledge possible. Kant called the thing-in-itself X, which exists but whose nature is unknown."..."
2. The thing-in-itself as absolute unity."..."
Kant believed that there are only three such things-in-itself, namely the three entities discussed in traditional metaphysics: the soul, the universe, and God."..."
In Kant's view, these three entities are not objects of knowledge; they are unknowable. This is not only because the categories of understanding cannot be applied to them, but more importantly because they cannot present their own nature to people in intuition. As the sum of conditions, they transcend the limitations of any individual experience.",
"However, metaphysical discussion of these three entities is not entirely meaningless. Because, as the sum of conditions making the empirical world (i.e., the worldview in knowledge) possible, they are also the total prerequisites for constructing knowledge."..."
Kant called this activity of reason the activity of constructing rules of rules. In other words, the study of absolute "entities" is the prerequisite for rationalizing scientific cognitive activities and the driving force for science to continuously explore new research areas."..."
Thus, the "logical function" of the thing-in-itself as "absolute unity" is both negative—it opposes people transcending the limitations of experience to understand an absolute unity that is not a cognitive object" (Recognizes limits as negative.) "—and constructive—it encourages people not to stagnate within the existing scope of knowledge but to continuously construct new cognitive objects, thus constantly expanding the realm of knowledge." (Infinite regress of questioning at least in the beginning as positive.),
"In Kantian philosophy, the thing-in-itself (transcendental ego) as the subject is the intrinsic condition making empirical activity possible. Unlike traditional empiricism, which views the cognitive subject as a passive being, Kant emphasizes the transcendence of the subject."..."
Within the realm of theoretical philosophy, this transcendence manifests in three aspects:"..."
First, it transcends the one-sidedness of "immediate, direct experience" to obtain knowledge of universal necessity",
"Secondly, it is about transcending the limitations of currently acquired scientific knowledge to pursue a higher and more complete unity."..."
Thirdly, it is about transcending the inherent limitations of cognitive activity, which are inevitably subject to external things, and pursuing true freedom of one's own existence."..."
Kant's so-called third transcendence essentially declares that only by transcending the limitations of scientific cognitive activity can humanity achieve true freedom in the practical activity of creating ethical relationships."..."
Thus, Kant's true intention in emphasizing the unknowability of the thing-in-itself becomes clear: the thinking about scientific problems cannot replace the reflection on value problems; the ultimate concern of philosophy should be the question of the value of life, not the question of the realization of human freedom. And the question of human freedom is not a cognitive problem, but a question of belief, and also a question of pursuit."..."
Kant's analysis and argumentation of the unknowable thing-in-itself, on the one hand, affirms the rationality of empirical scientific cognitive activity and criticizes the error of old metaphysics in pursuing transcendental knowledge; on the other hand, it reveals a more worthy area for philosophical reflection: the question of the degree of freedom of human existence."..."
Therefore, "not replacing scientific cognitive activity, but focusing on the rationality of all human behavior" is the limit established by Kant's metaphysical research. This limitation is both negative and positive."..."
Kant's Copernican philosophical revolution in the realms of theory and practice",
"The spirit embodied in agnostic philosophy is a spirit of skepticism. In the history of philosophy, skepticism represents a critical spirit and fearless courage—a spirit that is unafraid of power, refusing to submit to authority, and daring to challenge traditional theories, especially those with dogmatic and authoritarian tendencies. It seeks out the internal conflicts of existing philosophical theories through criticism, examination, and challenge, proposing alternative solutions, thus providing the preconditions for the development of subsequent philosophical theories.

In this critical activity, it also exhibits a strong relativistic tendency, thus opposing the dogmatism and absolutism of traditional philosophy. It can be said that modern agnostic (or skeptical) philosophy did not win the respect of later generations because of its skeptical methods; fundamentally, it was its agnostic philosophical conclusions that prevented philosophy from returning to old metaphysics, thereby attracting the attention of later generations. In this sense, the historical role of agnosticism is both positive and negative."..."
On the positive side, agnosticism's critique of religious entities, its denial of material entities, and its skepticism towards spiritual entities strongly impacted the foundations upon which old metaphysics relied. Agnosticism, by promoting the spirit of modern experimental science" (Agnosticism is modern experimental scientific.) ", criticized mechanistic materialism and causality, as well as dogmatic thought." (Delegitimized Newtonian's mechanical materialism and pre-modern traditionalism as outdated traditional metaphysics.) "This shockwave of agnosticism even reached the foundations of religious theology, igniting a desire and enthusiasm for reflection on traditional moral and value systems."..."
Another positive outcome of agnosticism's critique of traditional metaphysics was its promotion of a shift in modern philosophical epistemology. Traditional philosophy demanded that metaphysics become "science" in the sense of "empirical natural science." This led old metaphysics to replace experimentation with speculation and experience with transcendence, attempting to provide humanity with a system of knowledge possessing absolute truth."..."
While "limiting" the boundaries of human knowledge, agnosticism pointed out the irrationality of this demand. Thus, it prompted a shift in modern philosophical epistemology from the study of "scientific epistemology" to "philosophical epistemology.""..."
This transformation has two direct consequences:"..."
First, it necessitates a demarcation between science and philosophy, allowing each to fulfill its own inherent purpose." (Modern Agnosticism separates science and philosophy.) ..."
Second, it requires replacing isolated, static, and one-sided metaphysical thinking with dialectical thinking;" (Modern agnosticism replaced fundamentalism with dynamical thinking.) "otherwise, one cannot explain the logically proven conclusion of agnosticism: that human knowledge possesses relativity, temporality, and is not absolute truth. Modern dialectics originates from this point." (Modern Agnosticism is relative.) "
Agnosticism has also found some resonance in contemporary philosophy. It opposes a priori truth theories, emphasizing the necessity of relying on empirical experience to obtain objectively valid knowledge, and stressing the importance of focusing on the current state of existence to acquire knowledge. These ideas have had a positive impact on contemporary positivism and the philosophy of linguistic analysis. At the same time, agnosticism limits the scope of human intellectual activity, suggesting that the meaning of human existence should be studied using methods different from those of natural sciences, and this has a significant impact on contemporary humanistic philosophy.",
"Of course, agnosticism also has undeniable destructive and negative influences.",
"References"..."[1] Tom Bottomore, translated by Chen Shuping et al. Dictionary of Marxist Thought. Zhengzhou: Henan People's Publishing House, July 1994." (Just one footnote at bottom compared to much text, yet it's sourced with book-references in middle of text, references to Marx, Engels  and other philosophers in person. The content seems good and even empathizes the many facets of agnosticism and what philosophy really means, slightly biased to Marx, Engels by focusing on them more on mundane quotes such as his observation on educated foreigners even though both are classified of doing pseudo-social-science, yet maybe I am wrong. I wish that Baidu explained the negative effects of agnosticism in a separate section and how to escape agnosticism reliably, which perhaps I missed it, and more footnotes.)
Agnosticism-note:a


Objectivity-note:v
2025.12.31/cambridge .org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/9EE2044CDA598BD815349912E61189D8/S104909652300063Xa.pdf/measuring-democratic-backsliding.pdf : p.3: "objective variable is based in fact rather than a combination of opinion and fact. A useful “litmus test” is whether multiple qualified experts with access to the needed information would reach the same conclusion (Cheibub, Gandhi, and Vreeland 2010).", "An objective indicator from V-Dem is the variable “per- centage of the population with suffrage,” which asks: “What share of adult citizens as defined by statute has the legal right to vote in national elections?” These variables can be constructed on the basis of clear observational criteria and require little if any judg- ment from coders.";
2026.04.16/philpapers .org/archive/LITOAS-2.pdf : p.1: "kind of objectivism in epistemology that involves the acceptance of objective epistemic norms. It is generally regarded as harmless. There is another kind of objectivism in epistemology that involves the acceptance of an objectivist account of justification, one that takes the justification of a belief to turn on its accuracy. It is generally regarded as hopeless. It is a strange and unfortunate sociological fact that these attitudes are so prevalent. Objectivism about norms and justification stand or fall together. Justification is simply a matter of conforming to norms. In this essay, I shall make the case for objectivism about justification.
1. Introduction
I will defend two objectivist views. The first is a view about epistemic norms. Objectivists about norms believe that some norms have objective application conditions (i.e., conditions that don't supervene upon our non-factive mental states or the subjective aspects of our mental lives). The second is a view about epistemic justification. Objectivists about justification believe that justification depends upon whether certain objective conditions obtain. If, say, some objective condition is met and there's a norm that says that you shouldn't believe that it's raining if this condition is met, you couldn't justifiably believe that it's raining because this condition is met. It might not seem that the condition is met. You might have evidence that leads you to think that you violate no norms, but your belief still wouldn't be justified because you violated this norm.
Norms identify the conditions under which someone should or should not believe, do, or feel something. Objectivists and subjectivists agree that some norms have subjective application conditions (e.g., if there's a norm that requires probabilistic coherence there is a norm with a subjective application condition). Their disagreement is about whether there are any further norms that require us to believe or refrain from believing when objective conditions obtain. Their disagreement is about norms like these:
You shouldn't believe p unless you know p (Only Knowledge).1
You shouldn't believe p unless p is true (Only Truth).2
Objectivists will have their disagreements about these norms (e.g., some would argue that Only Truth needs to be supplemented by further norms and some would argue that Only Knowledge delivers the wrong verdict in Gettier cases), but they wouldn't think that these aren't genuine norms just because we refer to something objective in",
p.2: "specifying their application conditions. Subjectivists, on the other hand, insist that all genuine norms have subjective application conditions, conditions we specify by reference to subjective aspects of your mental life. Normative evaluation, they'll say, should always be concerned with relations between a subject's attitudes or actions and further features of our subjective mental lives.";
2026.04.16/researchgate .net/publication/227712020_Objective_Reasons : "In order to establish that judgments about practical reasons can be objective, it is necessary to show that the applicable standards provide an adequate account of truth and error. This in turn requires that these standards yield an extensive set of substantive, publicly accessible judgments that are presumptively true. This output requirement is not satisfied by the standards of universalizability, consistency, coherence, and caution alone. But it is satisfied if we supplement them with the principle that desire is a source of minimal reasons. This principle is justified despite currently fashionable arguments against the claims of desire.";
Objectivity-note:a

Objective idealism-note:v
2026.05.10/philosophyprofessor .com/philosophies/objective-idealism/ : "first major articulation is in Friedrich Schelling's System of Transcendental Idealism (1800) and his later Naturphilosophie. Schelling argued that nature and mind (or spirit) are two manifestations of a single underlying absolute. Nature is "visible spirit"; spirit is "invisible nature".  Schelling's project was to overcome the Kantian dualism between phenomena (the world as it appears) and noumena (the world as it is in itself). The absolute, on Schelling's view, manifests itself both objectively (as nature) and subjectively (as mind). The two perspectives reveal the same underlying reality."..."prototype of objective idealism. The absolute is mental in some sense, but not a finite mind; it is the source of both the natural world and finite consciousness, neither of which fully captures it.",
"most ambitious objective idealism is Hegel's absolute idealism. Hegel's mature system, articulated in the Science of Logic (1812–1816), the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences (1817), and the Lectures on the Philosophy of History, presents reality as the self-development of the Absolute Spirit (Geist).",
"Hegelian-influenced contemporary philosophy", "Panpsychism", "Process philosophy", "Theistic philosophy",
"argument from analogy. Why think reality is mental? Our experience is mental, but extrapolating from one's own experience to the entire universe seems unwarranted. Objective idealists reply that the dialectical or transcendental arguments (Hegel, Bradley) provide independent grounds.
The complexity objection. Objective idealism, especially in Hegelian form, is enormously complex. Critics charge that the complexity is gratuitous: simpler frameworks (materialism, neutral monism) handle the same data with fewer commitments.
The Russell-Moore critique. Russell and Moore in the early 1900s attacked Bradley's idealism as resting on confused arguments — especially about the nature of relations. Russell's "Logical Atomism" (1918) was a deliberate alternative to Bradleian idealism and helped establish analytic philosophy.",
"Objective idealism connects with several other doctrines:  Idealism — the broader category. Subjective idealism — the principal contrast. Transcendental idealism — Kant's intermediate position. The absolute — the central concept. Dialectic — Hegel's method. Internal relations doctrine — Bradley's central thesis. Holism — natural ally. Pantheism — theological cousin. Panpsychism — contemporary descendant. Process philosophy — Whiteheadian relative.",
"major figures are Schelling and Hegel in German Idealism; F. H. Bradley, Bernard Bosanquet, and Josiah Royce in British and American absolute idealism; and to varying degrees the early Russell and G. E. Moore (before they turned against the school)",
"Through the rise of analytic philosophy (Russell, Moore) and logical positivism in the early 20th century. Russell's "Logical Atomism" was a deliberate alternative to Bradleian idealism. The complexity and obscurity of Hegelian metaphysics also worked against the school.
Is objective idealism still defended today?
The strict doctrine is rare, but elements survive in Hegelian-influenced contemporary philosophy (Brandom, McDowell), in panpsychism (Galen Strawson, David Chalmers), in process philosophy (Whitehead and his successors), and in some philosophical theology."
; 2026.05.10/iep.utm .edu/germidea/ : "Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) had been Schelling’s classmate in Tübingen from 1790-1793. Along with the poet Friedrich Hölderlin (1770-1843), the two had collaborated on The Oldest Program for a System of German Idealism (1796). After following Schelling to Jena in 1801, Hegel published his first independent contributions to German idealism, The Difference Between Fichte’s and Schelling’s System of Philosophy (1801), in which he distinguishes Fichte’s “subjective” idealism from Schelling’s “objective” or “absolute” idealism. Hegel’s work documented the growing rift between Fichte and Schelling. This rift was to expand following Hegel’s falling-out with Schelling in 1807, when Hegel published his monumental Phenomenology of Spirit (1807). Although Hegel only published three more books during his lifetime, Science of Logic (1812-1816), Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences (1817-1830), and Elements of the Philosophy of Right (1821), he remains the most widely-read and most influential of the German idealists.
2. Logic
The German idealists have acquired a reputation for obscurity, because of the length and complexity of many of their works. As a consequence, they are often considered to be obscurantists and irrationalists. The German idealists were, however, neither obscurantists nor irrationalists. Their contributions to logic are earnest attempts to formulate a modern logic that is consistent with the idealism of their metaphysics and epistemology.
Kant was the first of the German idealists to make important contributions to logic. In the Preface to the second (B) edition of the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant argues that logic has nothing to do with metaphysics, psychology, or anthropology, because logic is “the science that exhaustively presents and strictly proves nothing but the formal rules of all thinking”",
"German idealism’s contributions to logic were largely dismissed following the rise of empiricism and positivism in the nineteenth century, as well as the revolutions in logic that took place at the beginning of the twentieth century. Today, however, there is a renewed interest in this part of the idealist tradition, as is evident in the attention which has been paid to Kant’s lectures on logic and the new editions and translations of Hegel’s writings and lectures on logic.",
"idealism espoused by the German idealists is, however, different from other kinds of idealism with which contemporary philosophers may be more familiar. While earlier idealists maintained that reality is ultimately intellectual rather than material (Plato) or that the existence of objects is mind-dependent (Berkeley), the German idealists reject the distinctions these views presuppose. In addition to the distinction between the material and the formal and the distinction between the real and the ideal, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel also reject the distinction between being and thinking, further complicating the German idealists’ views on metaphysics and epistemology.
Kant’s idealism is, perhaps, the most moderate form of idealism associated with German idealism. Kant holds that the objects of human cognition are transcendentally ideal and empirically real. They are transcendentally ideal, because the conditions of the cognition human beings have of objects are to be found in the cognitive faculties of human beings. This does not mean the existence of those objects is mind-dependent, because Kant thinks we can only know objects to the extent that they are objects for us and, thus, as they appear to us. Idealism with respect to appearances does not entail the mind-dependence of objects, because it does not commit itself to any claims about the nature of things in themselves. Kant denies that we have any knowledge of things in themselves, because we do not have the capacity to make judgments about the nature of things in themselves based on our knowledge of things as they appear.
Despite our ignorance of things in themselves, Kant thought we could have objectively valid cognition of empirically real objects. Kant recognized that we are affected by things outside ourselves and that this affection produces sensations.",
"To say that the idealism of Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel is more radical than Kant’s idealism is to understate the difference between Kant and the philosophers he inspired. Kant proposed a “modest” idealism, which attempted to prove that our knowledge of appearances is objectively valid. Fichte, however, maintains the very idea of a thing in itself, a thing which is not an object for us and which exists independently of our consciousness, is a contradiction in terms. There can be no thing in itself, Fichte claims, because a thing is only a thing when it is something for us. Even the thing in itself is, in fact, a product of our own conscious thought, meaning the thing in itself is nothing other a postulation of our own consciousness.",
"Fichte concludes that “everything which occurs in our mind can be completely explained and comprehended on the basis of the mind itself” (Breazeale 1988, 69). This is a much more radical form of idealism than Kant maintained.",
"Schelling defended Fichte’s idealism in On the I as Principle of Philosophy, where he maintained that the I is the unconditioned condition of both being and thinking. Because the existence of the I precedes all thinking (I must exist in order to think) and because thinking determines all being (A thing is nothing other than an object of thought), Schelling argued, the absolute I, not Reinhold’s principle of consciousness, must be the fundamental principle of all philosophy. In subsequent works like the System of Transcendental Idealism, however, Schelling pursued a different course, arguing that the essential and primordial unity of being and thinking can be understood from two different directions, beginning either with nature or spirit. It could be deduced from the absolute I as Fichte had done, but it could also arise from the unconscious but dynamic powers of nature. By showing how these two different approaches complemented one another, Schelling thought he had shown how the distinction between being and thinking, nature and spirit, could be overcome.
Fichte was not pleased with the innovations of Schelling’s idealism, because he initially thought of Schelling as a disciple and a defender of his own position. Fichte did not initially respond to Schelling’s works, but, in an exchange that began in 1800, he began to argue that Schelling had confused the real and the ideal, making the I, the ideal, dependent upon nature, the real. Fichte thought this violated the principles of transcendental idealism and his own Wissenschaftslehre, leading him to suspect that Schelling was no longer the disciple he took him to be. Intervening on Schelling’s behalf as the dispute became more heated, Hegel argued that Fichte’s idealism was “subjective” idealism, while Schelling’s idealism was “objective” idealism. This means that Fichte considers the I to be the absolute and denies the identity of the I and the not-I. He privileges the subject at the expense of the identity of subject and object. Schelling, however, attempts to establish the identity of the subject and object by establishing the objectivity of the subject, the I, as well as the subjectivity of the object, nature. The idealism Schelling and Hegel defend recognizes the identity of subject and object as the “absolute,” unconditioned first principle of philosophy. For that reason, it is often called the philosophy of identity.
It is clear that by the time he published the Phenomenology of Spirit, Hegel was no longer interested in defending Schelling’s system. In the Phenomenology, Hegel famously calls Schelling’s understanding of the identity of subject and object “the night in which all cows are black,” meaning that Schelling’s conception of the identity of subject and object erases the many and varied distinctions which determine the different forms of consciousness. These distinctions are crucial for Hegel, who came to believe that the absolute can only be realized by passing through the different forms of consciousness which are comprehended in the self-consciousness of absolute knowledge or spirit (Geist).
Contemporary scholars like Robert Pippin and Robert Stern have debated whether Hegel’s position is to be regarded as a metaphysical or merely epistemological form of idealism, because it is not entirely clear whether Hegel regarded the distinctions that constitute the different forms of consciousness as merely the conditions necessary for understanding objects (Pippin) or whether they express fundamental commitments about the way things are (Stern). However, it is almost certainly true that Hegel’s idealism is both epistemological and metaphysical. Like Fichte and Schelling, Hegel sought to overcome the limits Kant’s transcendental idealism had placed on philosophy, in order to complete the idealist revolution he had begun. The German idealists agreed that this could only be done by tracing all the different parts of philosophy back to a single principle, whether that principle is the I (in Fichte and the early Schelling) or the absolute (in Hegel).
4. Moral and Political Philosophy
The moral and political philosophy of the German idealists is perhaps the most influential part of their legacy, but it is also one of the most controversial.";
2026.05.10/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Karl_Leonhard_Reinhold : "Reinhold tried to show that Kant's philosophy provided an alternative to either religious revelation or philosophical skepticism and fatalistic pantheism. But Kant's Critique of Pure Reason was a difficult and confusing book. It was not widely read and had little influence. Reinhold decided to write his comments on it in the literary journal The German Mercury. He skipped over the beginning and middle of the book and started at the end. Reinhold showed that the book was best read backwards, that is, starting with the end section.", "According to historian of philosophy Karl Ameriks, "Fichte, Hegel, Schelling, Schiller, Hölderlin, Novalis, and Friedrich Schlegel all developed their thought in reaction to Reinhold's reading of Kant..."";
2026.05.10/scielo .org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0188-66492025000200093 : "Schelling’s 1806 essay against Fichte is important for two reasons: it discusses (1) the impossibility of idealism to grasp the real and objective status of Being and, therefore, the need for a metaphysical grounding of reflection situated outside of consciousness itself; (2) the discovery of the irreversibility of nature in God, which sheds new light on Schelling’s speculations about the relation between the ideal and the real ground of philosophy. Schelling changed the stance first presented in the System of Transcendental Idealism of 1800 to one according to which there is a non-derivative relation between nature and God: both are independent beings; at the same time, he makes God, as in classical metaphysics, a being that transcends nature. This allows Schelling to overcome the problem of the idealist distinction between logical and real movement, although it destroys the possibility of a single system of philosophy in the years after 1806.";
2026.05.10/iep.utm .edu/schellin/ : "dominant and most often limited understanding of Idealism as systematic metaphysics of the Subject is applicable more to Hegel’s philosophy than Schelling’s.",
"While initiating the Post-Kantian Idealism of the Subject, Schelling went on to exhibit in his later works the limit and dissolution of such a systemic metaphysics of the Subject. Therefore, the convenient label of Schelling as one German Idealist amongst others ignores the singularity of Schelling’s philosophy and the complex relationship he had with the movement of German Idealism.  The real importance of Schelling’s later works lies in the exposure of the dominant systemic metaphysics of the Subject to its limit rather than in its confirmation. In this way, the later works of Schelling demand from the students and philosophers of German Idealism a re-assessment of the notion of German Idealism itself. In that sense, the importance and influence of Schelling’s philosophy has remained “untimely.” In the wake of Hegelian rational philosophy that was the official philosophy of that time, Schelling’s later works was not influential and fell onto deaf ears. Only in the twentieth century when the question of the legitimacy of the philosophical project of modernity had come to be the concern for philosophers and thinkers, did Schelling’s radical opening of philosophy to “post-metaphysical” thinking receive renewed attention.  This is because it is perceived that the task of philosophical thinking is no longer the foundational act of the systematic metaphysics of the Subject. In the wake of “end of philosophy,” the philosophical task is understood to be the inauguration of new thinking beyond metaphysics. In this context, Schelling has again come into prominence as someone who in the heyday of German Idealism has opened up the possibility of a philosophical thinking beyond the closure of the metaphysics of the Subject. The importance of Schelling for such post-metaphysical thinking is rightly emphasized by Martin Heidegger in his lecture on Schelling of 1936. In this manner Heidegger prepares the possibility of understanding Schelling’s works in an entirely different manner. Heidegger’s reading of Schelling in turn has immensely influenced the Post-Heideggerian French philosophical turn to the question of “the exit from metaphysics”. But this Post-Structuralist and deconstructive reading of Schelling is not the only reception of Schelling. Philosophers like Jürgen Habermas, whose doctorate work was on Schelling, would like to insist on the continuation of the philosophical project of modernity, and yet attempt to view reason beyond the instrumental functionality of reason at the service of domination and coercion. Schelling is seen from this perspective as a “post-metaphysical” thinker who has widened the concept of reason beyond its self-grounding projection. During the last half of the last century, Schelling’s works have tremendously influenced the post-Subject oriented philosophical discourses.",
..."Schelling appears to be the mark that delineates the limit of the systematic task of philosophy, “the end of philosophy and the task of thinking” as Heidegger says. Prominent Schelling scholars like Manfred Frank and Andrew Bowie (1993) have, however, pointed out that Schelling had never abandoned the idea of ‘system’, although the idea of ‘system’ was no longer grounded on a restricted, narcissistic concept of reason as totalizing and self-grounding but as opening to that which cannot be thought in the concept.
For the sake of convenience we can roughly divide the philosophical career of Schelling into four stages:
a. Naturphilosophie and Transcendental Philosophy
b. Identity philosophy
c. The Middle period: Freedom essay and The Ages of the World
d. Positive Philosophy (Philosophy of Mythology and Philosophy of Revelation)
a. Naturphilosophie and Transcendental Philosophy
The significance of Schelling’s early philosophical works lies in its radically new understanding of nature that departs significantly from the then dominant philosophical and scientific understanding of nature. Perhaps the best the way to approach the Schelling of Naturphilosophie is to see him, on the one hand, in relation to the dominant mechanistic determination of nature at that time, that of the Newtonian mathematical determination of nature according to which nature follows certain determinable physical laws of motion and rest, and that can be grasped in the objective cognition that has universal and non-relative validity and on the other hand, as a development of post-Kantian philosophy that led to a radical revision of Kant himself. Schelling’s philosophy of nature thus arose out of the demand to respond to the mechanistic determination of nature that was dominant at that time on the one hand, and to respond to the problems that arose in Kant’s division of the phenomenal realm of nature and noumenal realm of freedom. This demanded a dynamic philosophical account of nature where nature is no longer seen as a totality of objects that are a mere inert, opaque mass, but nature that is subjected to universal laws of causality. Such a dynamic philosophy of nature must be able to resolve the abyss that is opened up in the wake of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. It is the abyss between the deterministic, causal, conditioned realm of understanding on the one hand, and the unconditioned realm of ethical self-determination on the other hand, between theoretical philosophy and practical philosophy. The task that the Post-Kantian philosophy has given to itself is to bridge this gap between the conceptual, constitutive realm of nature which can be grasped by causal laws that has universal validity, and the ethical spontaneity of the practical reason where the ethical subject is beyond the conditioned realm of determination and is thus a free Subject of self-determination. This Subject is the Subject of freedom that cannot be grounded in the constitutive principles of understanding but in the regulative Ideas of reason.", "Schelling’s early works flourished under the influence of Fichte’s thinking. In 1797 Schelling published an essay called Treatise Explicatory of the Idealism in the “Science of Knowledge” in Philosophisches Journal edited by Immanuel Niethammer. This essay is crucial document for understanding the transition from Kantian critical philosophy to German Idealism. While attempting to elucidate what Kant would have intended if Kant’s philosophy is to prove internally cohesive, Schelling moves to the task of unifying theoretical and practical philosophy in a single principle in such a manner that he actually moves beyond both Kantian and Fichtean philosophy. What allows this unification of theoretical and practical philosophy is the Spirit’s infinite striving to represent the universe. The Spirit is not a static entity given, something mysterious X, but infinite becoming and infinite productivity. It is in this ceaseless production lies the organic nature of human Spirit that is moved by its immanent laws and that has its purposive-ness within itself.",
"same year Schelling published his  Naturphilosophie that further elaborates the concept of organism through analysis of natural phenomena with the help of scientific studies of the day. This work responds to the dual tasks mentioned above. On the one hand it must give an account of a dynamic process of the emergence of nature as against the mechanistic, deterministic understanding of nature; and on the other hand, to resolve the problem left by Kant, that of bridging the realm of theoretical and practical philosophy by developing a dynamic philosophy of nature that takes into account Fichtean dialectical philosophy of consciousness. Like the Treatise of the same year, this new philosophy of nature is not grounded in the self-positing, unconditioned self-consciousness but by positing a “non-objective”, unconditioned in nature itself which Schelling calls “productivity”. It is this productivity that emerges through the logic of polar oppositions between subject and object that is shown to lead to a higher subject-object synthesis. For Schelling such a dialectical logic is deducted as a movement of potencies. The first potency is the movement of infinite to the finite. The second potency makes the reverse movement, while the third potency alone, which is higher than the other two, unities preceding potencies. In this manner Schelling explains magnetism as the first potency, electricity as the second and chemistry as the third potency that dialectically sublates the other two. Schelling’s philosophy of nature that attempts to develop the dynamic process of Idealism from the objective side can be seen as a parallel development to the Subjective Idealism that is elaborated by Fichte.
In the Treatise Explicatory of the Idealism in the “Science of Knowledge” of 1797 Schelling hints at the idea of “the history of self-consciousness”. The Spirit through its originary activity presents the infinite in the finite, a movement whose goal is self-consciousness that marks the unification of theoretical and practical philosophy, nature and history. Schelling perfects this model in his System of Transcendenatl Idealism.   Schelling’s publication of The System of Transcendental Idealism in 1800 brought immediate fame to the young 25 year old philosopher. Schelling here draws from Fichte’s great insight that self-consciousness is not a mere “given entity”. It is not an unknown and inaccessible X,  a mysterious transcendental “in-itself” as the formal ground of cognition, but a coming into presence of itself, a pure self-positing emergence through the dialectical process of self-positing and self-limitation. In that way a “history of self-consciousness” can be deduced from one principle that explains the coming into being of the theoretical cognition that at its limit passes into the practical realm of freedom, that is, the objective world of history . This is the task of Schelling’s System of Transcendental Idealism of 1800. Thus the axiomatic sense of Fichtean I=I is transformed into the dynamic deduction of the self-consciousness by one principle. This is emergence of the Idealist notion of System whose possibility, according to the Idealists, is already given in Kantian Critical philosophy; a possibility is denied by Kant himself.
“The history of self-consciousness” comes into being in three stages or epochs. While the first epoch manifests the coming into being of “productive intuition” from “original sensation” and the second epoch manifests the emergence of “reflection” from “productive intuition”, the third epoch recounts the emergence of “the absolute act of will” from “reflection”. At the end of the third epoch, “the history of self-consciousness” passes into the practical realm where the deduction of the concept of history is shown to be the realm of unity of freedom and necessity. This has led Schelling to ask at the end of System: how the Subject which is now a completed self-consciousness can become conscious of that moment of its origin which is now unconscious for it, a past that appears to have receded into an immemorial origin and is inaccessible? It now appears that the condition of possibility of consciousness as such remains irreducible to consciousness itself. This is the problem that has become decisive, not only for Schelling’s subsequent philosophical career, but for the fate of Idealism as such. It now appears as if our self-consciousness is driven or constituted by an unconscious ground, forever inaccessible to consciousness, which can never be grounded in consciousness itself.
For Schelling this shows the limit of philosophical cognition and at the same time the importance of works of art. By refusing the claim to say or represent the synthesis of unconscious and conscious, the work of art rather shows it. Therefore art can be said to be the “the eternal organ and document of philosophy” whose basic character is an “unconscious infinity” that arises in the work of art’s synthesis of nature and freedom. While the artist initiates a work of art with a manifest, conscious intention, she, in an unconscious and unintentional manner, depicts infinity without representing or saying it. Such an unintentional showing exceeds the representational acts of consciousness. It cannot be reduced to categorical statements. Therefore works of art cannot be understood on the basis of pre-given set of rules. Works of art are not exhausted in the normative or axiomatic definitions as to ‘what constitutes art as such’. What constitutes the ‘essence’ of art lies rather in its excess of showing over the said. In that sense works of art are more analogous with organisms by virtue of its existing as a link between unconsciousness and consciousness. Such a link can only be shown and therefore remains irreducible to the propositional character of judgment. Schelling develops such insights further in his lectures on The Philosophy of Art (1802), two years after The System of Transcendental Idealism . Unlike Hegel’s lectures on Aesthetics where Hegel argues that “the work of art is a thing of the past” in so far as it no longer has an essential relation to the Absolute even though works of art will continue to be produced, and thus pass into the sobriety of philosophy’s Absolute Knowledge, Schelling sees works of art and philosophy as manifesting the differential mode of the Absolute where art retains an essential, singular and irreducible role.",
"b. Identity Philosophy
In 1795,  Friedrich Hölderlin published an article called On Judgment and Being that has proved to be of decisive importance for the later development of German Idealism. In this small article Hölderlin attempts to think of an Absolute identity, a prior and originary ground of consciousness that cannot be grasped or known within the immanence of self-consciousness. Hölderlin calls this originary identity “being”( Seyn) which he distinguishes from Judgment ( das Urteil). Hölderlin here attempts to think of an originary identity that grounds the reflective judgment. According to Hölderlin this reflective judgment which is the unity of a disjunction, separation or difference between the subject and the object, must already presuppose an originary identity before judgment. In so far as judgment presupposes the difference between the subject and the object of consciousness, it must already be grounded in an identity. This identity is being (Seyn) which, because of its ground character, remains irreducible to the reflective consciousness. In order for judgment to be possible, it must be grounded in a principle that exceeds judgment itself. This originary identity is being which is before or without consciousness.
In his Identity philosophy, Schelling too attempts to move beyond the immanence of self-consciousness and the circle of reflective judgment. With this move, Schelling decisively breaks away from the Fichtean subjective Idealism. The question of ‘I’ is no longer the point of departure, unlike that of Fichte’s absolute ‘I’ that is not an inert substance but arises purely in the act of self-positing. Rather, here it is the question of consciousness as a result of a process which is to be grasped not merely from the side of the Subject of self-consciousness but from the other side as well. This relation between subject and object thus can no longer be grounded within self-consciousness itself but in an absolute indifference that is prior to this distinction and hence, that can only be presupposed but is never accessible to reflective judgment or to the categories of understanding. Unlike that of reflective philosophy, the question is no longer that of making a correspondence between the subject and the object of consciousness. Such a representational philosophy of correspondence is here abandoned. The problem is rather that of explaining the manifestation of a finite world from a ground that is forever excluded from the infinite chain of conditioned, finite, particular entities. In order not to fall into dualism, which Jacobi alludes is the dualism between the unconditioned ground on the one hand and the infinite chain of conditioned, finite entities on the other, Schelling has to explain the manifestation of the finite world out of its unconditioned ground, from an absolute indifference, without falling into the logic of reflective thinking which Hegel later uses to develop in his Phenomenology of Spirit. This is the emergence of the finite world of entities that are connected to each other in an infinite chain of predicates from an originary indifference which is unconditioned. This emergence is not a smooth transition but a qualitative leap, a diversion, a falling away (Abfall) from its originary ground. Later in his critique of Hegel, Schelling argues that such a leap cannot be understood on the basis of Hegelian modality of dialectical negativity that arrives at absolute knowledge only on the basis of the self-cancellation of the finite.
Perhaps the most lucid and systematic exposition of Schelling Identity philosophy will be found in his posthumously published lecture called The System of Philosophy in General and of the Philosophy of Nature in Particular (1804).";
2026.05.13/mdpi .com/2076-0787/14/4/84 : "letter from 11 November 1989: “Ich sehe ein, daß Novalis’ spekulative Produktivität der von Hölderlin vielleicht überlegen war” (I recognize that Novalis’ speculative productivity was perhaps superior to that of Hölderlin). But he contended that Novalis came much later than Hölderlin to a critique of Fichte, arguing, therefore, that Hölderlin had been the pioneer in overcoming a philosophy of reflection. But this, too, is doubtful. According to Friedrich Strack’s new dating, Hölderlin’s sketch Urtheil und Seyn (Judgment and Being) was not written in April 1795, as Henrich, with great philological effort and authority, had argued,14 but, at the earliest, in December 1795, if not in January or February 1796 (Strack 2013, p. 13 ff.). This significant little text was written on what appears to be the flyleaf of a special printing of Schelling’s Philosophische Briefe über Dogmaticismus [sic!] und Kriticismus (Philosophical Letters on Dogmatism and Criticism), which Schelling brought along for his friend during a visit to Nürtingen or Stuttgart in December 1795. On the other hand, according to Hans-Joachim Mähl, the first editor of the Fichte-Studien, Novalis began these notes in September 1795.15 Indeed, his reasonings here on being, identity, and judgment, which are so similar to the argumentation in Hölderlin’s sketch, are found at the very beginning of his notes (Novalis 1965, p. 104). Whatever the exact chronology may be, both Hölderlin and Hardenberg converge surprisingly in their reaction to the Jena “constellation”. Both owned the first sections of Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre (Science of Knowledge; Waibel 2000, p. 22 ff.; Mähl in Novalis 1965, p. 30 f.), which initially was printed lecture by lecture and made accessible only to those in attendance; the complete book first appeared in early summer 1795. And both received repeated requests from Niethammer for submissions to his recently established Philosophisches Journal. Novalis’ Fichte-Studien, written September 1795 through Juli 1796 and so named not by him but much later by the editors, were probably the sketch of an essay Novalis intended to write in response to these requests.16 This also seems plausible in light of the notes themselves: the occasional addressing of an (implicit) reader, and, in general, their dialogical style seem to point toward such an intended publication. Hölderlin, too, was urged by Niethammer to submit an article to the Philosophisches Journal, and in his correspondence from 1795/1796 he mentions repeatedly that he was working on one.17 Perhaps he was referring to his Neue Briefe zur ästhetischen Erziehung (New letters on aesthetic education); he writes in several letters how he was wrestling—not without anguish and misgivings—on this project. Or it may be that some of the philosophical fragments from 1795 and 1796 that have been collected in the 17th volume of the Frankfurt Hölderlin-Edition (Hölderlin 1991) were intended for this purpose. The Philosophisches Journal was conceived as a forum for testing the robustness—or the untenability—of a so-called “first and highest principle” of philosophy.",
"These are the thoughts I wrote down while still in Waltershausen, when I read the first parts, immediately after reading Spinoza; Fichte confirms my (Hölderlin 2009, p. 48). At this point a collector or auctioneer ripped out a part of the manuscript. Nevertheless, it is clear that at least one conversation took place where Fichte made some concessions to Hölderlin.36",
"In contrast to Novalis, Hölderlin did not avoid the old conundrum of self-consciousness when he sought a solution in the realm of poetry. He was still on the trail of the de se problem he had so discerningly described in Urtheil und Seyn. But, in 1800, Hölderlin did, in fact, transfer the solution of the (cognitive–theoretical) de se problem onto poetry. This is demonstrated most clearly in the long annotation in the “Verfahrungsweise des poëtischen Geistes” (On the operation of the poetic spirit, Hölderlin 1994, pp. 540–42). Here, Hölderlin discusses the “subjektive Natur” (subjective nature), or what, a few lines earlier, he had called the “ursprüngliche poetische Individualität, das poetische Ich” (Hölderlin 1994, p. 539; “the original poetic individuality, the poetic I”; Hölderlin 2009, p. 287). To state the issue far too succinctly, in this text, a state of unconscious—pre-reflective—“Innigkeit” (inwardness), which Hölderlin also calls “subjektive Natur” (subjective nature) or the “Alleinseyn” (solitude) of spirit (Hölderlin 1994, pp. 540, 542) is contrasted to a state of “reell” (real), “direct”, or “gerade” (direct) opposition (Hölderlin 1994, pp. 541, 535, 533). The former (in which just a hint of opposition does not disrupt unity, and, therefore, is called “harmonisch” [harmonic]61) is unconscious, the latter, conscious. But only the former guarantees unity; the latter destroys it." (Novalis didn't moved to objectivity.);
2026.05.13/iep.utm .edu/objectiv/ : "Berkeley’s Idealism asserts that the only realities are minds and mental contents. He does, however, have a concept of objective reality. A table, for example, exists objectively in the mind of God. God creates objective reality by thinking it and sustains any objective reality, such as the table, only so long as he continues to think of it. Thus the table exists objectively for us, not just as a fleeting perception, but as the totality of all possible experiences of it.";
2026.05.13/plato.stanford .edu/entries/schelling/ : "Schelling was born in Leonberg near Stuttgart on 27 January 1775. He attended a Protestant seminary in Tübingen from 1790 to 1795, where he was close friends with both Hegel and the poet and philosopher Friedrich Hölderlin. He moved to Leipzig in 1797, then to Jena, where he came into contact with the early Romantic thinkers, Friedrich Schlegel and Novalis, and, via Goethe’s influence, took up his first professorship from 1798 to 1803.", "The significance of the work of the early Schelling (1795–1800) lies in its attempts to give a new account of nature which, while taking account of the fact that Kant had irrevocably changed the status of nature in modern philosophy, avoids some of the consequences of Kant’s theory that were seen as problematic by Kant’s contemporaries and successors. For the Kant of the Critique of Pure Reason (1781, 1787) nature is largely seen in the ‘formal’ sense, as that which is subject to necessary laws. These laws are accessible to us, Kant argues, because cognition depends on the subject bringing forms of thought, the categories, to bear on what it perceives. The problem this leads to is how the subject could fit into a nature conceived of in deterministic terms, given that the subject’s ability to know is dependent upon its ‘spontaneous’ self-caused ability to judge in terms of the categories. Kant’s response to this dilemma is to split the ‘sensuous’ realm of nature as law-bound appearance from the ‘intelligible’ realm of the subject’s cognitive and ethical self-determination. However, if the subject is part of nature there would seem to be no way of explaining how a nature which we can only know as deterministic can give rise to a subject which seems to transcend determinism in its knowing and in its self-determined actions. Kant himself sought to bridge the realms of necessity and spontaneity in the Critique of Judgement (1790), by suggesting that nature itself could be seen in more than formal terms: it also produces self-determining organisms and gives rise to disinterested aesthetic pleasure in the subject that contemplates its forms. The essential problems remained, however, that (1) Kant gave no account of the genesis of the subject that transcends its status as a piece of determined nature, and (2) such an account would have to be able to bridge the divide between nature and freedom.
The tensions in Schelling’s philosophy of this period, which set the agenda for most of his subsequent work, derive, then, from the need to overcome the perceived lack in Kant’s philosophy of a substantial account of how nature and freedom come to co-exist. Two ways out of Kantian dualism immediately suggested themselves to thinkers in the 1780s and 90s. On the one hand, Kant’s arguments about the division between appearances and things in themselves, which gave rise to the problem of how something ‘in itself’ could give rise to appearances for the subject, might be overcome by rejecting the notion of the thing in itself altogether. If what we know of the object is the product of the spontaneity of the I, an Idealist could argue that the whole of the world’s intelligibility is therefore the result of the activity of the subject, and that a new account of subjectivity is required which would achieve what Kant had failed to achieve. On the other hand, the fact that nature gives rise to self-determining subjectivity would seem to suggest that a monist account of a nature which was more than a concatenation of laws, and was in some sense inherently ‘subjective’, would offer a different way of accounting for what Kant’s conception did not provide. Schelling seeks answers to the Kantian problems in terms that relate to both these conceptions. Indeed, it is possible to argue that the conceptions are in one sense potentially identical: if the essence of nature is that it produces the subjectivity which enables it to understand itself, nature itself could be construed as a kind of ‘super-subject’. The main thinkers whose work is regarded as exemplifying these alternatives are J.G. Fichte, and Spinoza.
The source of Schelling’s concern with Spinoza is the ‘Pantheism controversy’, which brought Spinoza’s monism into the mainstream of German philosophy. In 1783 the writer and philosopher F.H. Jacobi became involved in an influential dispute with the Berlin Enlightenment philosopher Moses Mendelssohn over the claim that G.E. Lessing had admitted to being a Spinozist, an admission which at that time was tantamount to the admission of atheism, with all the dangerous political and other consequences that entailed. In his On the Doctrine of Spinoza in Letters to Herr Moses Mendelssohn, (1785, second edition 1789), which was influenced by his reading of Kant’s first Critique, Jacobi revealed a problem which would recur in differing ways throughout Schelling’s work. Jacobi’s interpretation of Spinozism was concerned with the relationship between the ‘unconditioned’ and the ‘conditioned’, between God as the ground of which the laws of nature are the consequent, and the linked chains of the deterministic laws of nature. Cognitive explanation relies, as Kant claimed, upon finding a thing’s ‘condition’. Jacobi’s question is how finding a thing’s condition can finally ground its explanation, given that each explanation leads to a regress in which each condition depends upon another condition ad infinitum. Any philosophical system that would ground the explanation of a part of nature thus “necessarily ends by having to discover conditions of the unconditioned” (Scholz, ed., 1916, p. 51). For Jacobi this led to the need for a theological leap of faith, as the world’s intelligibility otherwise threatened to become a mere illusion, in which nothing would be finally grounded at all. In the 1787 Introduction to the first Critique Kant maintains this problem of cognitive grounding can be overcome by acknowledging that, while reason must postulate the “unconditioned (…) in all things in themselves for everything conditioned, so that the series of conditions should thus become complete” (Kant, Critique of Pure Reason B, p. XX), by restricting knowledge to appearances, rather than assuming it to be of “things in themselves”, the contradiction of seeking conditions of the unconditioned can be avoided. As we have already seen, though, this gives rise precisely to the problem of how a subject which is not conditioned like the nature it comes to know can emerge as the ground of knowledge from deterministic nature.
The condition of the knowledge of appearances for Kant is the ‘transcendental subject’, but what sort of ‘condition’ is the transcendental subject? The perception that Kant has no proper answer to this problem initially unites Schelling and Fichte. Fichte insists in the Wissenschaftslehre (1794) that the unconditioned status of the I has to be established if Kant’s system is to legitimate itself. He asserts that “It is (…) the ground of explanation of all facts of empirical consciousness that before all positing in the I the I itself must previously be posited” (Fichte 1971, p. 95), thereby giving the I the founding role which he thought Kant had failed adequately to explicate. Fichte does this by extending the consequences of Kant’s claim that the cognitive activity of the I, via which it can reflect upon itself, cannot be understood as part of the causal world of appearances, and must therefore be part of the noumenal realm, the realm of the ‘unconditioned’. For Fichte the very existence of philosophy depends upon the free act of the I which initiates the reflection on its own activity by the I.
Schelling takes up the issues raised by Jacobi and Fichte in two texts of 1795: Of the I as Principle of Philosophy or on the Unconditional in Human Knowledge, and Philosophical Letters on Dogmatism and Criticism. In a move which prefigures aspects of Heidegger’s questioning of the notion of being, he reinterprets Kant’s question as to the condition of possibility of synthetic judgements a priori as a question about why there is a realm of judgements, a manifest world requiring syntheses by the subject for knowledge to be produced, at all. In Of the I, Schelling puts Kant’s question in Fichtean terms: “how is it that the absolute I goes out of itself and opposes a Not-I to itself?” (Sämmtliche Werke [SW], I/1, p. 175). He maintains that the condition of knowledge, the ‘positing’ by the I of that which is opposed to it, must have a different status from the determined realm which it posits: “nothing can be posited by itself as a thing, i.e. an absolute/unconditioned thing (unbedingtes Ding) is a contradiction” (ibid., p. 116). However, his key worry about Fichte’s position already becomes apparent in the Philosophical Letters, where he drops the Fichtean terminology: “How is it that I step at all out of the absolute and move towards something opposed (auf ein Entgegengesetztes)?” (ibid., p. 294). The problem Schelling confronts was identified by his friend Hölderlin, in the light of Jacobi’s formulation of the problem of the ‘unconditioned’. Fichte wished to understand the absolute as an I in order to avoid the problem of nature ‘in itself’ which creates Kantian dualism. For something to be an I, though, it must be conscious of an other, and thus in a relationship to that other. The overall structure of the relationship could not, therefore, be described from only one side of that relationship. Hölderlin argued that one has to understand the structure of the relationship of subject to object in consciousness as grounded in ‘a whole of which subject and object are the parts’, which he termed ‘being’. This idea will be vital to Schelling at various times in his philosophy.
In the 1790s, then, Schelling is seeking a way of coming to terms with the ground of the subject’s relationship to the object world. His aim is to avoid the fatalist consequences of Spinoza’s system by taking on key aspects of Kant’s and Fichte’s transcendental philosophy, and yet not to fall into the trap Hölderlin identified in Fichte’s conception of an absolute I. In his Naturphilosophie (philosophy of nature), which emerges in 1797 and develops in the succeeding years, and in the System of Transcendental Idealism of 1800, Schelling wavers between a Spinozist and a Fichtean approach to the ‘unconditioned’. In the Naturphilosophie the Kantian division between nature as appearance and nature in itself is seen as resulting from the fact that the nature theorised in cognitive judgements is objectified in opposition to the knowing subject. This objectification, the result of the natural sciences’ search for fixed laws, fails to account for the living dynamic forces in nature, including those in our own organism, with which Kant himself became concerned in the third Critique and other late work, and which had played a role in Leibniz’s account of nature. Nature in itself is thought of by Schelling as a ‘productivity’: “As the object [qua ‘conditioned condition’] is never absolute/unconditioned (unbedingt) then something per se non-objective must be posited in nature; this absolutely non-objective postulate is precisely the original productivity of nature” (SW I/3, p. 284). The Kantian dualism between things in themselves and appearances is a result of the fact that the productivity can never appear as itself and can only appear in the form of ‘products’, which are the productivity ‘inhibiting’ itself. The products are never complete in themselves: they are like the eddies in a stream, which temporarily keep their shape via the resistance of the movement of the fluid to itself that creates them, despite the changing material flowing through them.
Schelling next tries to use the insights of transcendental philosophy, while still avoiding Kant’s dualism, to explain our knowledge of nature. The vital point is that things in themselves and ‘representations’ cannot be absolutely different because we know a world which exists independently of our will, which can yet be affected by our will:
one can push as many transitory materials as one wants, which become finer and finer, between mind and matter, but sometime the point must come where mind and matter are One, or where the great leap that we so long wished to avoid becomes inevitable. (SW I/2, p. 53)
The Naturphilosophie includes ourselves within nature, as part of an interrelated whole, which is structured in an ascending series of ‘potentials’ that contain a polar opposition within themselves. The model is a magnet, whose opposing poles are inseparable from each other, even though they are opposites. As productivity nature cannot be conceived of as an object, since it is the subject of all possible real ‘predicates’, of the ‘eddies’ of which transient, objective nature consists. However, nature’s ‘inhibiting’ itself in order to become something determinate means that the ‘principle of all explanation of nature’ is ‘universal duality’, an inherent difference of subject and object which prevents nature ever finally reaching stasis (SW I/3, p. 277). At the same time this difference of subject and object must be grounded in an identity which links them together, otherwise all the problems of dualism would just reappear. In a decisive move for German Idealism, Schelling parallels the idea of nature as the producing subject with the spontaneity of the thinking subject, which is the condition of the syntheses required for the constitution of objectivity. The problem for Schelling lies in explicating how these two ‘subjects’ relate to each other.
In the System of Transcendental Idealism Schelling goes back to Fichtean terminology, though he will soon abandon most of it. He endeavours to explain the emergence of the thinking subject from nature in terms of an ‘absolute I’ coming retrospectively to know itself in a ‘history of self-consciousness’ that forms the material of the system. The System recounts the history of which the transcendental subject is the result. A version of the model Schelling establishes will be adopted by Hegel in the Phenomenology of Mind. Schelling presents the process in terms of the initially undivided I splitting itself in order to articulate itself in the syntheses, the ‘products’, which constitute the world of knowable nature.",
"How, though, does one gain access by thought to what cannot be an object of consciousness? This access is crucial to the whole project because without it there can be no understanding of why the move from determined nature to the freedom of self-determining thinking takes place at all.
Schelling adopts the idea from the early Romantic thinkers Friedrich Schlegel and Novalis, whom he knew in Jena at this time, that art is the route to an understanding of what cannot appear as an object of knowledge. Philosophy cannot represent nature in itself because access to the unconscious must be via what appears to consciousness in the realm of theoretical knowledge. The work of art is evidently an empirical, appearing object like any other, but if it is not more than what it is qua determinable object it cannot be a work of art, because this requires both the free judgement of the subject and the object’s conveying of something beyond its objective nature. Although the System’s own very existence depends upon the transition from theoretical to practical philosophy, which requires the breaking-off of Jacobi’s chain of ‘conditions’ by something unconditioned, Schelling is concerned to understand how the highest insight must be into reality as a product of the interrelation of both the ‘conscious’ and the ‘unconscious’. Reality is not, therefore, essentially captured by a re-presentation of the objective by the subjective. Whereas in the System nature begins unconsciously and ends in conscious philosophical and scientific knowledge, in the art work: “the I is conscious according to the production, unconscious with regard to the product” (SW I/3, p. 613). The product cannot be understood via the intentions of its producer, as this would mean that it became a ‘conditioned’ object, something produced in terms of a pre-existing rule, and would therefore lack what makes mere craft into art. Art is, then, “the only true and eternal organ and document of philosophy, which always and continuously documents what philosophy cannot represent externally” (ibid., p. 627). The particular sciences can only follow the chain of conditions, via the principle of sufficient reason, and must determine any object via its place in that chain, a process which has no necessary end. The art object, on the other hand, manifests what cannot be understood in terms of its knowable conditions, because an account of the materials of which it is made or of its status as object in the world does not constitute it as art. Art shows what cannot be said. Philosophy cannot positively represent the absolute because ‘conscious’ thinking operates from the position where the ‘absolute identity’ of the subjective and the objective has always already been lost in the emergence of consciousness.
Although Schelling’s early work did not fully satisfy either himself, or anybody else, it manages to address, in a cogent and illuminating fashion, many topics which affect subsequent philosophy. The model presented in the System impresses not least because, at the same time as establishing the notion of the history of self-consciousness that would be decisive for Hegel, it offers, in a manner which goes beyond its sources in Fichte, a model of the relationship between the subject and its conceptually inaccessible motivating forces which would affect thinkers from Schopenhauer, to Nietzsche, to Freud, and beyond.
3. Identity Philosophy
Although the period of Schelling’s ‘identity philosophy’ is usually dated from the 1801 Presentation of My System of Philosophy until sometime before the 1809 On the Essence of Human Freedom, the project of that philosophy can be said to be carried on in differing ways throughout his work. The identity philosophy derives from Schelling’s conviction that the self-conscious I must be seen as a result, rather than as the originating act it is in Fichte, and thus that the I cannot be seen as the generative matrix of the whole system. This takes him more in the direction of Spinoza, but the problem is still that of articulating the relationship between the I and the world of nature, without either reverting to Kantian dualism or failing to explain how a purely objective nature could give rise to subjectivity.
Schelling’s mature identity philosophy, which is contained in the System of the Whole of Philosophy and of Naturphilosophie in Particular, written in Würzburg in 1804, and in other texts between 1804 and 1807, breaks with the model of truth as correspondence. It does so because:
It is clear that in every explanation of the truth as a correspondence (Übereinstimmung) of subjectivity and objectivity in knowledge, both, subject and object, are already presupposed as separate, for only what is different can agree, what is not different is in itself one. (SW I/6, p. 138)
The crucial problem is how to explain the link between the subject and object world that makes judgements possible, and this cannot be achieved in terms of how a subject can have thoughts which correspond to an object essentially separate from it. For there to be judgements at all what is split and then synthesised in the judgement must, Schelling contends, in some way already be the same. This has often been understood as leading Schelling to a philosophy in which, as Hegel puts it in the Phenomenology, the absolute is the ‘night in which all cows are black’, because it swallows all differentiated knowledge in the assertion that everything is ultimately the same, namely an absolute which excludes all relativity from itself and thus becomes inarticulable. This is not a valid interpretation of Schelling’s argument. In an early version of the identity philosophy he had said the following:
For most people see in the essence of the Absolute nothing but pure night and cannot recognise anything in it; it shrinks before them into a mere negation of difference, and is for them something purely privative, whence they cleverly make it into the end of their philosophy (…) I want to show here (…) how that night of the Absolute can be turned into day for knowledge (SW I/4, p. 403).
In order to try to get over the problem in monism of how the One is also the many, Schelling, following the idea outlined above from Hölderlin, introduces a notion of ‘transitive’ being, which links mind and matter as predicates of itself. Schelling explains this ‘transitivity’ via the metaphor of the earth:
you recognise its [the earth’s] true essence only in the link by which it eternally posits its unity as the multiplicity of its things and again posits this multiplicity as its unity. You also do not imagine that, apart from this infinity of things which are in it, there is another earth which is the unity of these things, rather the same which is the multiplicity is also unity, and what the unity is, is also the multiplicity, and this necessary and indissoluble One of unity and multiplicity in it is what you call its existence (…) Existence is the link of a being (Wesen) as One, with itself as a multiplicity. (SW I/7, p. 56)
‘Absolute identity’ is, then, the link of the two aspects of being, which, on the one hand, is the universe, and, on the other, is the changing multiplicity which the knowable universe also is. Schelling insists now that “The I think, I am, is, since Descartes, the basic mistake of all knowledge; thinking is not my thinking, and being is not my being, for everything is only of God or the totality” (SW I/7, p. 148), so the I is ‘affirmed’ as a predicate of the being by which it is preceded. In consequence he already begins to move away, albeit inconsistently, from the German Idealist model in which the intelligibility of being is regarded as a result of its having an essentially mind-like structure.
Schelling is led to this view by his understanding of the changing and relative status of theoretical knowledge. It is the inherent incompleteness of all finite determinations which reveals the nature of the absolute. His description of time makes clear what he means: “time is itself nothing but the totality appearing in opposition to the particular life of things”, so that the totality “posits or intuits itself, by not positing, not intuiting the particular” (SW I/6, p. 220). The particular is determined in judgements, but the truth of claims about the totality cannot be proven because judgements are necessarily conditioned, whereas the totality is not. Given the relative status of the particular there must, though, be a ground which enables us to be aware of that relativity, and this ground must have a different status from the knowable world of finite particulars. At the same time, if the ground were wholly different from the world of relative particulars the problems of dualism would recur. As such the absolute is the finite, but we do not know this in the manner we know the finite. Without the presupposition of ‘absolute identity’, therefore, the evident relativity of particular knowledge becomes inexplicable, since there would be no reason to claim that a revised judgement is predicated of the same world as the preceding — now false — judgement."
"Nasser, D., 2013, The Romantic Absolute: Being and Knowing in Early German Romantic Philosophy, 1795–1804, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
[Exploration of the meaning of the Absolute in Early German Romanticism, including Schelling.]";
2026.05.13/ia801606.us.archive .org/13/items/f-w-j-schelling-the-schelling-reader/f-w-j-schelling-the-schelling-reader.pdf : p.8: "Schelling (1775-1854) stands between J.G. Fichte and G.W.F. Hegel in the sequence of great German thinkers that follow in the wake of Immanuel Kant's Copernican revolution in philosophy. Anyone who takes the history of philosophy seriously will find it impossible to gainsay his enormous contribution, not only to what has recently been called `the twenty-five years of philosophy' 1(running from the Critique of Pure Reason of 1781 to the Phenomenology of Spirit in 1807), but, beyond that, to post-Hegelian currents and debates in the 1830s and 1840s. And yet, Schelling is also much more than an important figure within the German Idealist tradition: according to Martin Heidegger, Schelling `shattered' idealism; 2for Paul Tillich, he is to be listed alongside `the other rebelling existentialists of the nineteenth century (Kierkegaard, the younger Marx, Nietzsche)'; 3and his philosophies of nature inspired later scientific advances in dynamics, electromagnetic field theory and theories of evolution.4Indeed, for Schellingians from Coleridge to Zizek, he represents, in Karl Jaspers's words, `a prototype of modern possibilities;' 5
or,asGabrielMarcelputsit:`Forthoughthatregardsphilosophyasa heroic adventure entailing risks and skirting abysses, he will always
remain an exhilarating companion: 6",
p.9: "judge for themselves whether Schelling approaches these themes in the same way throughout his life or whether he changes his mind. That is, it addresses the Hegelian accusations of Schelling as a 'Proteus of philosophy' who `carried out his philosophical education in public:$ Is Schelling simply an inconsistent philosopher who ch anges his mind and his system from one year to the next? And is this the case for each element of his thinking? Or are there ways in which Schelling's thought develops in a continuous fashion, building and elaborating upon his earlier ideas?",
p.14: "From an early age, Schelling demonstrated an exceptional facility with language and philosophy: he learned Greek, Hebrew, Latin and Arabic, and, by the time he was fourteen, had undertaken a serious study of Plato and Leibniz.
In 1790, at the age of fifteen, Schelling began his studies at the Tübingen theological seminary, which he briefly attended with Friedrich Hölderlin and G.W.F. Hegel, both five years Schelling's senior; for a short while, they even shared a room. Although their formal training at the seminary was conservative, Schelling, Hölderlin and Hegel were united in their enthusiasm for what appeared to be the contemporary rejuvenation of both political life and philosophical science in line with the French Revolution and a radical reinterpretation of Kant's critical turn. In a jubilant expression of their shared commitment to the ideals of the French Revolution, they planted a `freedom tree' in the seminary cloister; Schelling is sometimes credited as the first German translator of the Marseillaise.1",
p.15: "Fichte's conception of the self-positing `I' was profoundly important for Schelling, as was the second major influence upon his thought during this period: Spinoza, whose philosophy was undergoing something of a renaissance in Germany at the end of the eighteenth century. In April 1795, Schelling writes to his former roommate, Hegel: `I have become a Spinozist!' 3He began publishing his own philosophical work in 1794, and these texts of the mid-1790s - such as Of the I as Principle of Philosophy - bear the mark of both his Fichtean and Spinozist sympathies.
In the spring of 1796, Schelling moved to Leipzig where he worked as a private tutor and began his own intensive study of physics, chemistry and physiology. It was here that he wrote his Ideas for a Philosophy of Nature, which drew upon recent empirical discoveries in order to transform Kant's critical project of providing a metaphysical grounding for the natural sciences. In the autumn of 1798, after publishing a second major work on the philosophy of nature - On the World-Soul - Schelling moved again, this time to Jena, at the express invitation of Goethe, who Schelling had met and worked with on a previous visit to Jena and Weimar.
Schelling's years in Jena comprise an intense period of his career and personal life. In addition to publishing a number of important works, he was a (somewhat peripheral) member of the romantic circle. He became particularly close with Caroline Schlegel, the wife of August Wilhelm Schlegel, and the two ultimately began an affair, which negatively impacted Schelling's relationship with some of the other members of the group (particularly Friedrich Schlegel). In June 1800, Caroline's daughter, Auguste Böhmer, died of dysentery while in Bad Bocklet with Caroline and Schelling. Word soon began to spread that Schelling had intervened in Auguste's medical treatment and that he was responsible for her death; indeed, widely circulated pamphlets suggested that his idealist philosophy of nature and the medical practices connected therewith were ultimately to blame.
Although it came under serious attack, Schelling's philosophy of nature also continued to gain devotees during these years. His Journal of Speculative Physics, founded in January of 1800, made a significant impact on the philosophy and sciences of the day, thanks in no small part to the fact that it included his most important writings of the period. Schelling's increasingly apparent view that, within the whole system of philosophy, the philosophy of nature is more fundamental than transcendental idealism led to tensions in his intellectual friendship with Fichte. Although the latter",
p.16:  "had, by this point, left for Berlin on account of his `atheism controversy', the two were in frequent contact and had even planned to edit a philosophical journal together. It gradually became evident, however, that the two held fundamentally irreconcilable positions regarding the nature of `first philosophy'; by January 1802, they ceased communication.
One philosopher who sided with Schelling in the dispute over the future of idealism and the status of the philosophy of nature was Hegel, whose first publication was the 1801 Difference Between Fichte's and Schelling's Systems of Philosophy. Schelling had invited Hegel to Jena as a means of helping him advance an academic career. As one of their contemporaries anonymously writes, 'Schelling fetched a stout warrior to Jena from his fatherland Württemberg, through which he now gives notice to the astonished public, that even Fichte stands far below his own viewpoint: 4While teaching at the University of Jena, Hegel joined Schelling in editing the Critical Journal of Philosophy, which the latter had originally intended to edit with Fichte.
On 26 June 1803, Schelling and Caroline married, just five weeks after her official divorce from A.W. Schlegel. In the fall, Schelling took up a position in Würzburg, where he was made full professor of philosophy. Schelling and Caroline remained in Würzburg until April 1806, when, for political reasons, they were forced to move to Munich. While in Munich, Schelling became a member of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences and the General Secretary of the Academy of Fine Art. It was also during this period that Schelling fell out with Hegel. Although their final exchange of letters in 1807 is cordial and does not explicitly confront the nature of their disagreement, its source is clear: In the Preface to his Phenomenology of Spirit, Hegel criticizes a particular form of the philosophy of nature that was practised by certain followers of Schelling, if not by Schelling himself. Schelling could not help but take these remarks personally, and Hegel did little to mend the friendship.
A far more devastating event in Schelling's life occurred two years later, when Caroline died of dysentery on 7 September 1809 with Schelling by her side. During the summer of 1810, while still mourning Caroline's death, Schelling temporarily lived in Stuttgart where he presented a series of private lectures. He returned to Munich in the autumn and began his project on the Ages of the World - a project that he frequently announced but never published, and of which only fragments remain. In 1812, he published his last major piece of original philosophy during his lifetime: a critical response to Jacobi's charge that Schellingian philosophy leads to atheism.
Schelling also remarried in 1812. With his new wife, Pauline Gotter - the daughter of Caroline's friend, Luise - he had six children over the next twelve",
p.19: "Although recent scholarship has called into question the strict periodization of Schelling's philosophy, it has traditionally been divided up into five major periods or stages corresponding to what have been interpreted as important shifts in how he frames the very task of philosophy itself:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
( y )
The Early Period (1794-1796). The texts of the mid-1790s are often interpreted as belonging to a `Fichtean' period that focuses on the absolute `I' or subject as the ground of the system of knowledge and action.
The Early Philosophy of Nature (1797-1800). The work of this period focuses on the structure of the natural world. Although Schelling continues, during this period, the `Fichtean' project of understanding how the mind comes to know nature (e.g. in the 1800 System of Transcendental Idealism), he now argues that philosophy must also demonstrate how nature comes to be aware of itself through the mind.
The Philosophy of Identity (1801-1805). With the publication of the Presentation of My System of Philosophy, Schelling announces his turn to the fundamental basis of both his transcendental idealism and his philosophy of nature. This period of Schelling's thought is often identified as the `system of identity', since it is here that Schelling argues that mind an d nature are, at the most b asic level of reality, identical. The Middle Period (1809-1815). In 1809, Schelling publishes his
Philosophical Investigations into the Essence of Human Freedom, an essay that marks an important shift in his philosophical development While Schelling continues to understand the absolute in terms of `identity' he now emphasizes the developmental character of all that is - even interpreting `identity' itself as processual. Traditionally, this period of thought is also interpreted as the beginning of Schelling's focus on freedom, contingency and that which is in some sense beyond the grasp of reason.
The Late Period (1820-1850). The last period of Schelling's thought is distinct from the earlier work in a number of important ways that all follow from the fact that Schelling now sets up a distinction between negative and positive philosophy: the former exhibits the rationally necessary features of reality and the latter a ttends to the historical fact of the actual existence of the world, a fact which cannot be grasped by sheer reason but requires empirical confirmation.",
p.20: "discover both similarities and differences between the various periods of his thought. Our own view is that the apparent changes in Schelling's thought are often better understood dynamically: as one tendency in Schellingian thought comes to the fore, another tendency can lose its intensity, only to regain that intensity in subsequent years.
What, then, are some of the ideas that remain in play, in one way or another, throughout Schelling's intellectual development? The following s ix theses are often cited as key to Schelling's distinctive philosophical perspective:
(i)
Reality has an intelligible structure. Precisely how one accesses the intelligible structure of reality is a difficult issue ( and it is given detailed treatment in Chapters 5 and 6 of this volume); however, throughout the whole of his life, Schelling insists upon the rational character of being — even when he comes to argue that the ultimate ground of being is not immanent to reason. Indeed, on attending Schelling's lectures on the positive philosophy, Kierkegaard notes that, although `the world is not a logical consequence of God's nature; 10for Schelling, `the a priori content of the science of reason is ... the whole of actuality:"
Modern thought must no longer ignore the philosophical significance of nature. The intelligible structure of reality is not limited to the reality of the mind for Schelling, but extends to the natural world, as Chapter 3 below will show most clearly. For this reason, he is critical of what he sees as the unfounded priority given to the philosophy of mind in modernity. Philosophy must become, like it once was in ancient physics, attentive to the dynamic world of both organic and inorganic nature; it must become, or at least come to include, a non-reductionist, non-mechanical philosophy of nature. Consciousness is not all that exists; there is an unconscious dimension to reality. Related to Schelling's interest in natural phenomena is his more general understanding of consciousness as being in some sense dependent upon non-conscious or unconscious processes. This ultimately leads him to the idea that the ultimate ground of being is not only unconscious but even arational.
The basic elements of reality are parts of a whole. Schelling is a thinker of unity, identity and totality, and he argues that the conscious and unconscious dimensions of reality can only be understood in terms of their place within a unified whole. Although his conception of this unity undergoes important changes from one period of thought to the next, he remains committed to some version of the slogan of his youth: hen kai pan, the one and all.",
p.21: "(y) Works of art exhibit the full truth of reality. Although it is misleading to characterize Schelling as being interested in art over and above philosophy, Josiah Royce had good reason to describe him as the `prince of the romanticists': 12art is in no way deficient, for Schelling, but is a fully adequate way of presenting the structure of being. Reality is not, essentially, a `substance' or `thing, but a dynamic and productive process. Indeed, one reason that art exhibits the full truth of reality is that it expresses the unity of all that is through a process of creation. Art is not, however, the only aspect of the world that Schelling understands in terms of a fundamental creativity. At different points in his career, he foregrounds the productive activity of nature, the generation of gods in mythological consciousness and God's free and creative activity in history.
By no means do these six theses exhaust the threads woven throughout Schelling's intellectual development; they are intended to simply guide the reader who is beginning to explore the fabric of Schelling's thought in what follows.",
p.26: "In many of his texts, Schelling is primarily concerned with identifying an absolute' or `unconditioned' principle at the heart of his metaphysics - even
if the meaning of this principle seems to change from one text to another. At different stages in Schelling's thought, the `unconditioned' is understood as an `I', a natural process, a divinity immanent to the world, and something beyond being. But in each case, Schelling sees great importance in that which is unconditionally, i.e. that which conditions all things (Dinge) but is not itself conditioned (bedingt).
In fact, the metaphysical dualism between an unbedingt generative principle and that which it grounds - bedingt things in the empirical world - can be discerned in many of Schelling's philosophical writings from the earliest text excerpted below (Of the I) well into his middle period
represented below by The Ages of the World). In all of these texts, however, metaphysical dualism is tempered by an emphasis on strict metaphysical",
p.27: "unity (whether it is a unity already realized or still incomplete). It is for this reason that Schelling is often read as a philosopher of `the absolute', a philosopher who posits one single, unifying principle as the ground - and, in some cases, totality - of all that exists. This is part of his ongoing negotiation with the scandal of pantheism: he continually traverses a path between a Parmenidean metaphysics of all-encompassing unity that dissolves all real distinctions and a pluralistic metaphysics attentive to the differences between various domains of being.
The final two extracts in this chapter look beyond the so-called `middle period' to the metaphysics of Schelling's late philosophy and, in particular, the ways in which the discourse of `unconditioned, `absolute' principles informs his interrelated projects of negative and positive philosophy. For instance, in his description of positive philosophy, the late Schelling radicalizes the search for a principle that is beyond the conditioned - beyond things, beyond products and beyond what is created - by setting up the task of philosophy as the quest for something so fully unconditioned that it is beyond thought itself. Metaphysics thereby becomes, in part, the attempt to think the unthinkable.
(This means that, while Schelling is clearly involved in metaphysical speculation, he also finds himself working through methodological issues regarding the appropriate mode of access to the unconditioned, issues that will reappear in Chapter 6 of this volume.)
The following aims to guide the reader through five of the main ways that Schelling conceives the `unconditioned': (i) as the absolute `I' or self that grounds all knowledge (in the opening sections to the 1795 Of the I, Schelling's first substantial published work); (ii) as natural productivity (in the opening passage to the 1799 First Outline of a System of the Philosophy of Nature, which Schelling envisaged as a textbook overview for students taking his lectures in Jena); (iii) as the immanent development of the natural-divine cosmos (in the opening section on `The Past', i.e. the archaic grounds of creation, of the third fragmentary version of Schelling's
The Ages of the World, written in 1815); (iv) as that which conditions all conceivable determinations of being (from a lecture on the Presentation of the Purely Rational Philosophy, a course given in Berlin in approximately 1847); and (v) as the purely actual, transcendent creator of all that exists (in a late lecture entitled Alternative Deduction of the Principles of Positive Philosophy and delivered a couple of years earlier). A further way that Schelling conceives the unconditioned - namely, as the identity of self and nature, evident in texts from 1801 to 1806";
2026.05.13/philpapers .org/rec/SCHSPN-2 : "notebooks were written during the years that F. W. J. Schelling spent as a student at the Tübinger Stift (1790–1795). From dates written by Schelling in the margins, we can surmise that the first portion (AA II/4: 15–28) was begun in August of 1792, and the latter portion (AA II/5: 133–142) was written in early 1794. To this latter portion is appended a substantial work, Schelling’s Timaeus-commentary, which is not included in the present translation. It appeared as “Timaeus (1794)” (translated by Adam Arola, Jena Jolissaint, Peter Warnek) in Epoché 12: 2. These notebooks offer a window into Schelling’s philosophical development and proclivities, in light of his engagement with various Platonic dialogues, most notably the Ion, Theaetetus, Meno, Timaeus, and Philebus. They include discussions of divine power, rapture, and genius, especially as these relate to poetry, prophecy, and ordinary forms of human knowledge. These topics are discussed in the first portion (AA II/4: 15–25). In the latter portion, Schelling discusses myth, its function and relation to human greatness, Socrates’s daimonion, and the authority of tradition (AA II/4: 25–28; II/5: 133–142).";
2026.05.13/jstor .org/stable/24435119 : "ON THE POSSIBILITY OF A FORM FOR ALL PHILOSOPHY (1794) Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling" (Connection with beyond-universe's Absolute Form of Everything and Plato with his dialogues and maybe Schelling's description of breaking metaphysics's limits and boundaries, including questioning idealism.);
2026.05.13/dokumen .pub/the-unconditional-in-human-knowledge-four-early-essays-1794-1796-1nbsped-083872020x-9780838720202.html : "Tübingen, September 9, 1794";
2026.05.13/jstor .org/stable/20127778 : The Unconditional in Human Knowledge: The first published writings by Schelling were largely written in Tübingen at the conclusion of his seminary education and before his encounters with the new natural sciences (at Leipzig) and the New Romanticism (at Jena).... The first essay, "On the Possibility on the Form of All Philosophy," suggest the style and issues of Descartes; more proximately, it is a quest, after Kant, for a ground to philosophy. Philosophy has become no longer the contemplation of objects but the analysis of a dynamic self. "The I is posited by itself," Schelling wrote. "Through the same I, through, a not-I is also posited." Schelling quickly moves to develop that dialectical process  which will stay with his philosophy for the next six decades, reaching "the form of unconditionally, the form of conditionality, and the form of conditionality determined by unconditionality" (The fourth option "unconditionality determined by the conditionality" is missing.) This Descartes did not reach; towards this Fichte strove.
The second essay, "On the I" is broader, more a treatise than an enthusiastically composed outline  We see a glimpse of Tübingen under Sturm und Drang as Schelling introduced his theme of the new, radically subjective philosophy. "It is a daring step of reason to liberate";
2026.05.13/scribd .com/document/162920997/FWJ-Schelling-Of-the-I-as-Principle-of-Philosophy-or-the-Unconditional-in-Human-Knowledge : 
p.58: It is significant that Schelling sees in Kant the thinker who turned away from the remnant of formalism in Leibniz toward a philosophy founded on the reciprocal determination of form and content, which is the mark of the I.,
14 . The merely analytical form cannot constitute objective reality, which  requires "transcendental synthesis." Transcendental idealism is realism, in contrast to any philosophy restricted to formal analysis.,
p.59: "The Unconditional in Human Knowledge
Young Schelling's 2nd published essay developing his own interpretation of Fichte's 'das Ich' and opening the way for the Unconscious World-Soul as Immanent God-Nature",
Schelling implies in his 1795-02-04-letter while he worked in his essay that Hegel can soon learn why Schelling called himself as a Spinozist in his essay.,
p.60: The mistake of those who cannot understand Kant and Fichte and Schelling is precisely their notion that the I probably means some mysterious it called a mind or a soul or a spirit. They refer strictly and in ordinary sense to the speaker, reader or writer himself who refers to himself when he says I. The pronoun I means the act by which two events are established simultaneously, the awareness of myself; and the distinction between my I and any not-I.... Kant's phrasing is clearer: "the subject is at the same time its own object" Adopting Fichte's words, Schelling says of the I: "it is because it thinks itself, and it [can] think itself because it is. It produces itself by its own thinking–by absolute causality" (Of I. 167). None of these force you to grasp that you are an I. "I am because I am! – That thought forces you to slap instantly." (Of I, 168)

Objective idealism-note:a

Connection between German idealism and France:v
2026.05.21/web.archive .org/web/20260310105730/polcompball .wiki/Enlightenment_Thought : "Regional Tendencies  Diderotianism Expand  Fichtean Idealism Collapse  Anti-Bonapartism  Atheism (Accused)  Centralism  Collectivism  Cultural Nationalism  Francophilia  Freemasonry  Jacobinism  Mercantilism  Nihilism (Accused)  Panhumanism (Later on)  Paternalism  Patriotism  Protestant Theocracy (Later on)" Paris was more rational and Schelling as Fichte's disciple and therefore Schelling's influencer was somewhat influenced by Paris, which later affected Objective idealist Schelling. Schelling, Fichte and Hölderin as minir roommates set up a tree for the French Revolution. Rumors says that Schelling was the first to translate and bring the French to German culture.
Connection between German idealism and France:a

Schelling-Note:v
2026.05.14/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Friedrich_Wilhelm_Joseph_Schelling : "In 1793, Schelling contributed to Heinrich Eberhard Gottlob Paulus's periodical Memorabilien. His 1795 dissertation was De Marcione Paullinarum epistolarum emendatore (On Marcion as emendator of the Pauline letters).[9] In 1794, Schelling published an exposition of Fichte's thought entitled Ueber die Möglichkeit einer Form der Philosophie überhaupt (On the Possibility of a Form of Philosophy in General).[28] This work was acknowledged by Fichte himself and immediately earned Schelling a reputation among philosophers. His more elaborate work, Vom Ich als Prinzip der Philosophie, oder über das Unbedingte im menschlichen Wissen (On the I as Principle of Philosophy, or on the Unconditioned in Human Knowledge, 1795), while still remaining within the limits of the Fichtean idealism, showed a tendency to give the Fichtean method a more objective application, and to amalgamate Spinoza's views with it. He contributed articles and reviews to the Philosophisches Journal of Fichte and Friedrich Immanuel Niethammer, and threw himself into the study of physical and medical science. In 1795 Schelling published Philosophische Briefe über Dogmatismus und Kritizismus (Philosophical Letters on Dogmatism and Criticism), consisting of 10 letters addressed to an unknown interlocutor that presented both a defense and critique of the Kantian system.  Between 1796/97, there was written a seminal manuscript now known as the Das älteste Systemprogramm des deutschen Idealismus ("The Oldest Systematic Program of German Idealism"). It survives in Hegel's handwriting. First published in 1916 by Franz Rosenzweig, it was attributed to Schelling. It has also been claimed that Hegel or Hölderlin was the author.[29][30]  In 1797, Schelling published the essay "Neue Deduction des Naturrechts" ("New Deduction of Natural Law"), which anticipated Fichte's treatment of the topic in Grundlage des Naturrechts (Foundations of Natural Law). His studies of physical science bore fruit in Ideen zu einer Philosophie der Natur (Ideas Concerning a Philosophy of Nature, 1797), and the treatise Von der Weltseele (On the World-Soul, 1798). In Ideen Schelling referred to Leibniz and quoted from his Monadology. He held Leibniz in high regard because of his view of nature during his natural philosophy period.  In 1800, Schelling published System des transcendentalen Idealismus (System of Transcendental Idealism). In this book Schelling described transcendental philosophy and nature philosophy as complementary to one another. Fichte reacted by stating that Schelling's argument was unsound: in Fichte's theory nature as Not-Self (Nicht-Ich = object) could not be a subject of philosophy, whose essential content is the subjective activity of the human intellect. The breach became unrecoverable in 1801 after Schelling published "Darstellung des Systems meiner Philosophie" ("Presentation of My System of Philosophy"). Fichte thought this title absurd since, in his opinion, philosophy could not be personalized. Moreover, in this book Schelling publicly expressed his estimation of Spinoza, whose work Fichte had repudiated as dogmatism, and declared that nature and spirit differ only in their quantity, but are essentially identical. According to Schelling, the absolute was the indifference to identity, which he considered to be an essential philosophical subject.  The "Aphorismen über die Naturphilosophie" ("Aphorisms on Nature Philosophy"), published in the Jahrbücher der Medicin als Wissenschaft (1805–1808), are for the most part extracts from the Würzburg lectures, and the Denkmal der Schrift von den göttlichen Dingen des Herrn Jacobi ("Monument to the Scripture of the Divine Things of Mr. Jacobi")[20] was a response to an attack by Jacobi (the two accused each other of atheism[31]). A work of significance is the 1809 Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit und die damit zusammenhängenden Gegenstände (Philosophical Inquiries into the Essence of Human Freedom), which elaborates, with increasing mysticism, on ideas in the 1804 work Philosophie und Religion (Philosophy and Religion)."
Schelling-Note:a

Anti-realist realism-note:v
2026.05.14/philsci-archive.pitt .edu/22244/ : "influential role of Niels Bohr’s work in the anti-realist realist re-foundation of physics that took place during the 20th century. We will focus in how, developing the modern co-relational matrix of scientific understanding, his essentially anti-realist scheme was able to capture, subvert and defeat the realist program of science through the establishment of a weakened impotent form of “religious realism” grounded on faith instead of scientific conditions. Finally, we will focus in how, still today, anti-realist realism continues to rule the contemporary post-modern research in both (quantum) physics and philosophy."
Anti-realist realism-note:a

Anti-Realism-note:v
2025.08.03/cambridge .org/core/journals/dialogue-canadian-philosophical-review-revue-canadienne-de-philosophie/article/abs/global-antirealism-a-metaphilosophical-inquiryandrew-joseph-cortens-boulder-co-westview-2000-x-174-pp-5900/91A1DF748C84CCD68A57AA7DC9C7FAC9 : Global-/Object anti-realism (Object nihilism). Statemental., p.2: Many realists have taken objectivity, not a particular metaphysics, to be the essence in their position.; 2025.08.03/jstor .org/stable/20019509 : God, as a metaphysically real being, died in the 18th century, and has been closely followed to the grave by Truth and the Real Self.; 2025.08.03/mobt3ath .com/uplode/book/book-71360.pdf : Anti-realism accepts one truth, itself. So it contradicts.; 2025.08.04/Global Anti-realism (avebury Series In Philosophy) -- James O_ Young -- Avebury series in philosophy, Aldershot, Brookfield, USA, -- Avebury -- 9781859720585 -- 49ccc707b30a3e899dac461ec954c6b2 : Empiricism implies realism by possibility of perception. With his final conclusion at "How to be an anti-realist" of coherent belief-knowledge-theory, he's an objectivist anti-realist.; 2025.08.03/philpapers .org/archive/PENOVR.pdf : He said that Emotivism is anti-realism at explaining that his definition of assertions distinguishes him from Wright's definition. p.9: Mere expressional exclamations like "Yuk!" is anti-objectivist anti-realist. That made absolutely no pretense at either describing reality or meeting standards of objective correctness. p.10: From examples, Emotivists and moral relativists are committed to both anti-realism and anti-objectivism on moral affirmations. Good examples of realist antiobjecivist is the stereotypical general skeptic of epistemology on claims about the external world, understanding theology with faith instead reason & knowledge.
p.11: Humeian at bodies is anti-realist. Humeian at physical laws is anti-objectivist and can be concluded as Humeian skepticism being partly anti-objectivist anti-realism. Objectivism is opposed to total skepticism, subjectivism, and relativism.;
2026.04.25: 2026.04.24/philpapers .org/archive/LITOAS-2.pdf : p.5: Normative Objectivity leases room for error., "Kantian maxims of conduct (although I would not want to suggest that they can all be correct or incorrect in the same sense). Admittedly there are many pro and con attitudes that are neither correct nor incorrect, including stereotypical cases of wanting, liking, aversion, and disinterest. But my expressivist, who is not a normative nihilist" (His normative expressivist being justified there as objective and generally in this paper as realist.);
2026.05.14/medium .com/paul-austin-murphys-essays-on-philosophy/did-niels-bohr-go-too-far-59caa06c9f82 : "Niels Bohr perfectly expressed an anti-realist position on physics (without ever actually using the term “anti-realism”) in the following: “Physics is not about how the world is, it is about what we can say about the world.” And, in his The Unity of Human Knowledge (1958–1962), Bohr offers us a slightly more detailed anti-realist account of physics: “Physics is to be regarded not so much as the study of something a priori given, but rather as the development of methods of ordering and surveying human experience.” Of course, Bohr wasn’t alone. For example, the Swiss-American theoretical physicist, Wolfgang Pauli, went further when he rejected the opposition (i.e., between reality itself and what we can can know about reality) entirely when he stated the following (as quoted by N. David Mermin): “One should no more rack one’s brain about the problem of whether something one cannot know anything about exists all the same, than about the ancient question of how many angels are able to sit on the point of a needle.” In other words, “how Nature is” amounts to no more than a metaphysician’s dream."
Anti-Realism-note:a

Anti-Reality-note:v
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Anti-Reality_Sphere : "CONTAINED BY Reality Hypersphere And its Completely Proven.", "Everything inside of it (Anti-Reality) will Disintegrate and leave behind a nothing less than a nothing less than the undefinable nothingness.   Becoming [∆|Unstable|0]   There is a Possiblity that Anti-Realities can survive beyond the Anti-Reality Sphere but it will became unstable and "Everything" and "Everyone" inside of it Will either get [Evaporated]/[Deleted] or become [∆|Unstable|0]" (Moderate Lee, Mediocracy in Normalcide and Orwellian Realist in their respective, antagonistic world where the world's status quo represents their teams opposite like Anti-Centrism, Anti-Realism, Wackism and those 3 are ironically the extremists/far-fetched/wacky representing the unstable, surviving counterparts of their team.);
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Reality_Hypersphere : "TEMPORAL DIMENSION Beyond True Reality "Dimensionality"", "Sphere is Formed right after the Trueverse was created, preventing Mass Destruction and Instantaneous Collapse.  Before the Hypersphere Created, The True Reality and Trueverse where both Unstable and Laws and Physics inside where Ruined and Cause Mass Chaos And Destruction on both Civilizations and Verses.  So Gods and Civilizations United and Work with an Idea to Contain The True Reality And then Trueverse.", "Some Reality Gods Are Still Maintaining The Balance of Hypersphere till to this Day to Prevent Chaos to Broke out Again.
But if Something where to Contain this Sphere, The Reality Gods Will Find a Way to Make a Bigger one.
Yet there are limits to their frivolous folly." ;
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/True_Reality : "TEMPORAL DIMENSION
Beyond Imcomprehendable", "CONTAINED BY Trueverse? CONTAINS Reality Sphere?,Existence Sphere?",
"True Reality is a Reality that Containing Both Reality Sphere and Anti-Reality Sphere.  This is not a Reality Sphere neither a A Self-Contaning Verse so there is a Possibility that this Reality is Controling by a Civilization.  The True Reality is Formed Accidentaly Because of the Reality Spheres/Anti-Reality Spheres Multipliying Each other and Created a Bubble that Containing all Reality Spheres,Anti-Reality Spheres And Existence Spheres.";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Existence_Sphere : "CONTAINED BY Existence Sphere is not fully proven but there is potencialy bigger than this, The True Reality CONTAINS Supposed to Contain Reality Sphere,Anti-Reality Sphere", "Existence Sphere contains the Reality Sphere and the Anti-Reality Sphere. It is Beyond All Infinite Dimensional Measurements, And It's size will forever be unknown. The Age is unknown too but we know that the sphere was there before time existed, including negative time.",
"But we don't know for sure if this Sphere really Exists because of the Reason that nothing can go Beyond either Reality Sphere And Anti-Reality Sphere.";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Reality_Sphere : "This object is not even supposed to exist because its a Self containing Verse like Quantumverse and The Box.  Containing mostly Any Verses", "There is a Theory that the Reality Sphere is Contained by "Existence Sphere" which is not proven because nothing can go through Reality Barrier Which is Sealing it so no one Can go Reality Sphere.";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Antiverse : "Beings from this universe will think that the anti-matter they have is normal matter and our Universe is anti-matter.", "people of the verse considers law and order of our Universe anarchy, and their anarchy law and order. They think we're strange; we think they're strange.", "Standard traveling from a universe to antiverse is very difficult because you have to cross the entire UNNAMEDverse.", "Because time goes backwards in Antiverses, people in an antiverse will start becoming primitive and dumber as time goes on.";
2026.05.04/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Antiverse : "antiverses are outside of the UNNAMEDverse but, they contained by the Absoluteverse and Antimultiverse.";
2026.05.04/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Absoluteverse : "This verse is litteraly has no purpose except "being"";
2026.05.04/diversedaily .com/exploring-the-anti-reality-concept-does-the-universe-have-an-opposite/ : "Historically, various cultures and ideologies have explored notions akin to anti-reality. From ancient myths that conceptualize underworlds to modern theories such as alternate dimensions or mirror universes, the idea that there could be an opposite reality has intrigued humanity throughout the ages. These historical perspectives provide vital context as they emphasize humanity’s continuous quest to understand its existence through contrasting paradigms.",
"lies beyond the fringes of our comprehension.",
"Plato, in his work “The Republic,” introduced the Theory of Forms, which suggests that for every tangible object or idea in our realm, there exists an ideal form in a realm of perfect opposites. According to Plato, what we perceive in our world is merely a shadow of these perfect forms, with good and evil reflecting contrasting forces shaping human behavior and morality."(Beyond-universe's Absolute Forms of Everything above alldimensions's iteration. His article's support of Einstein’s theory of relativity uniting matter and energy and the implication with "anti-reality extend beyond mere philosophical musings; they often influence scientific inquiry, particularly in the realms of theoretical physics and cosmology" of anti-realism being rationalist and realism being pro-realist implies a scientific empiricism-bias, ignoring in the beginning more theoretical quantum mechanics.),
"Aristotle, a student of Plato, engaged with the concept of opposites through his examination of substance and essence. He contended that every entity is defined by its essence, and thus, understanding an object requires considering what it is not. This framework leads to the idea that existence is inherently relational, positioning beings in a network of interconnected opposites." (Seemingly related to iteration in alldimensions as reflections upon each other.),
"Hegel and Nietzsche further expanded on these ideas. Hegel’s dialectical method, which frames reality as a synthesis of opposing forces, suggests that contradictions drive progress in understanding. Meanwhile, Nietzsche challenged traditional notions of morality, positing that values emerge from a struggle against nihilism, presenting a more personal perception of duality.  Combined, these perspectives create a nuanced framework for contemplating how opposites interact within the broader inquiry of an anti-reality.",
"intersects with concepts such as multi-universes, quantum mechanics, and the elusive properties of dark matter and dark energy. Each of these scientific theories proposes a structure of reality that extends beyond our classical understanding of the universe.
Quantum mechanics challenges traditional views of existence, introducing notions of superposition and entanglement. This framework suggests that particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously and be instantaneously connected across distances. Such phenomena lead some theorists to entertain the possibility of alternate realities or universes where different outcomes of quantum events manifest, potentially hinting at an anti-reality that contrasts our own.
Similarly, string theory proposes that the fundamental components of the universe are one-dimensional “strings” rather than point-like particles. This theory encompasses multiple dimensions beyond our perceivable three-dimensional space and time, allowing for various configurations of reality. Specifically, string theory’s inherent complexity lends itself to the idea that alternative realities might exist, which could function as an oppositional framework to our known universe.
Discussions surrounding dark matter and dark energy further enrich the debate about anti-reality. These entities, which are theorized to constitute a significant portion of the universe, remain mysterious and largely undetected. They influence the expansion of the universe and may provide insights into conditions that differ from those we experience. Questions surrounding their role may illuminate possibilities for realms that operate under different laws of physics, suggesting a symmetry that could give rise to an anti-reality.", "antiparticle of the electron, known as a positron, carries a positive charge instead of a negative one. This fundamental difference in charge illustrates the intriguing nature of antimatter as a kind of “opposite” to the matter that constitutes our universe.",
"particle of matter collides with its corresponding antiparticle, both are destroyed, and energy is released in the form of gamma rays" (Yet Einstein's relativity theory according to this article says that matter and energy are the same or not and this article adopts this view with "two seemingly disparate entities but also emphasizes their interchangeable nature"? So energy/matter gets converted into gamma rays upon contact.),
"If the universe contained equal amounts of matter and antimatter, we would expect to observe substantial annihilation events throughout, yet this symmetry appears to break down in our observable reality, suggesting an imbalance between the two.
In scientific experiments, antimatter is created in particle accelerators, such as CERN’s Large Hadron Collider, where high-energy collisions can generate antiparticles.",
"As researchers apply both empirical evidence and speculative philosophy, the dialogue around anti-reality will only expand, potentially redefining our framework of existence and our place amidst the cosmos.
All these avenues of exploration underscore the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration as we seek to decipher the fundamental truths of our universe. The research and speculation surrounding anti-reality may illuminate paths that resonate through physics and philosophy alike, offering profound insights into existence itself." (Truth even with anti-reality. Sounds like ChatGPT wrote they article at part at least.);
2026.05.04/startpage .com/do/search?query=mysterylores%20%22anti-reality%22&lui=english : Lost webpage.;
2026.05.08/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/FinalLastSmallestVerse : "CONTAINED BY The Negative Beyond... CONTAINS Nothing and everything?";
2026.05.08: Overton Window represents the most influential/powerful ideology as shown by Radical Centrist Jreg explaining Neoliberalism. Dead Centrism as part of weakling centrism, which weakling centrism/minimal realism might represent what the surviving realists representing like mediacrat/Orwellian realist/moderate Lee have in common. Tier-lists in beyond-universe, alldimensions and beyondcosmology favors positive tier-lists and therefore realism over anti-realism.;
2026.05.08/zenology.fandom .com/wiki/Anti-Reality : "Anti-Reality is the anti-matterous realm that exists in juxtopose to Reality. It is composed of all known substances and entities within normal Reality, but as their opposites. Examples of this is that Anti-Light creates darkness and Anti-Darkness creates light. Time also regresses within Anti-Reality instead of going forward. It is unknown if negative doppelgangers of every sentient in Reality exists in Anti-Reality.";
2026.05.18/urbandictionary .com/define.php?term=anti-reality : "when one can still feel the presence of alcohol on oneself. After drinking 5 shots of hard liquor Slater was lost in his own anti-reality. anti-reality by natalya July 25, 2006"
Anti-Reality-note:a

Unreality-note:v
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/thesaurus/unreality : "as in illusion a conception or image created by the imagination and having no objective reality a sci-fi author who seems to have preferred the unrealities of his own fiction to the realities of the world about him Synonyms & Similar Words Relevance illusion dream fantasy daydream vision delusion idea hallucination phantasm mirage nightmare conceit chimera castle in the air pipe dream figment castle in Spain nonentity imaging fiction fancy concoction utopia ignis fatuus visualization fabrication cloudland fable brainchild cloud-cuckoo-land will-o'-the-wisp invention envisaging Shangri-la daymare Antonyms & Near Antonyms fact reality actuality" < 2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/thesaurus/invention : "as in innovation
something (as a device) created for the first time through the use of the imagination",
"as in fiction
something that is the product of the imagination"..."Antonyms & Near Antonyms" fact reality near: materiality actuality realness, "as in imagination"  ;
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/thesaurus/irreality : unreality. Related Words Relevance 1. unreality 2. fiction fantasy 3. surreality dreaminess fancy fictitiousness Dissimilar Words 1.reality fact actuality materiality 2. truth factuality authenticity 3. genuineness verity
Unreality-note:a


Beyond reality-note:v
2026.05.08/god-entities.fandom .com/wiki/Existences : "Existence means anything exists anything exists can be basic physical or advented meta physical or maybe beyond any physic and concepts.",
"first is fiction known as semi non existence. Fiction can be understanded by existence and non existence it is imaginary to both existence and non existence. Second is fully non existence cannot be understanded by existence and its simply indescrible,unimaginable,unthinkable,unexplainable and unguessable. Fiction can become fully nonexistent by forgottening by existence completely.", 
"Abstract is just concepts it half exists and not exists its similar to fiction but the difference is absract things are real things we use these abstract concepts in our real life. Absract is all the concepts and words and culture.",
"Metaxistence is when you go beyond all of Existence and non existence."..."Higher layers are very hard and complex when layer incrises the difficulty gets lot more harder and complex."..."6 layers into Metaexistence is those who "refuse" entirely of existence and all of non-existence. But not only existence and non-existence all of concepts including non-concepts.",
"True Absence is a state of non existence such in a state that is "self-destructive" and no matter what happens"..."True Absence is truest or maybe even beyond of absence.",
"Neither "refuse" nor "accept""..."Ultima Time collapses in true absence";
2026.05.08/god-entities.fandom .com/wiki/Microcosmology_(GE) : "Fake universe
Incorporating FAKE UNIVERSE, which considers all logically possible mathematical structures as real universes, would enrich your layers by viewing each as a mathematical reality, independent yet real. In this cosmology, each layer of your hierarchy becomes a distinct mathematical framework, and they aren't just different layers of reality but different fundamental mathematical realities. This would mean that each layer operates by unique, self-consistent mathematical laws that define its structure, adding a profound diversity of existence where even the concept of "reality" varies between layers.",
"Platonism and Forms
Platonism adds a timeless, transcendent level to your cosmology. Each layer could be seen as an "ideal form," where higher layers are closer to the ultimate "Form of the Good" (or the source of all forms). Lower layers in the hierarchy may only reflect shadows of these forms, adding to your theme of "illusory" and "fragile" under-layers. This hierarchical relationship means that each layer not only transcends the one below it but also represents a more refined reflection of absolute truths. This would add depth to the idea that the layers above contain a more genuine "realness" than the ones below.",
 "Apophatic Theology (Negative Theology)
Apophatic or Negative Theology posits that the ultimate nature of reality is beyond human comprehension, often describing it by what it is not rather than what it is. Applying this to your cosmology would suggest that higher layers are increasingly indescribable and unknowable. As entities ascend the hierarchy, each new layer approaches an incomprehensible level of being where definitions and concepts fall short.",
"Cataphatic Theology (Positive Theology)
Complementing apophatic ideas, Cataphatic Theology describes the divine by affirming what it is. In your cosmology, each layer could gain new positive attributes as it ascends, each new layer providing a clearer, more detailed vision of "ultimate reality."",
"Dialectical Duality of Reality and Fiction",
"Axiarchism and the Principle of Sufficient Reason
Drawing on axiarchism (the idea that reality is shaped by values or purposes) and the Principle of Sufficient Reason, you could argue that each layer has a purpose or telos that drives its existence. Each layer could be "necessary" in some way, such as representing a logical or moral necessity within the grander scheme. This can frame each layer as an integral step in an endless purpose-driven hierarchy, suggesting that this cosmology isn't random but follows a vast, infinite purpose or reason that weaves through every level.",
"Recursive Large Cardinals as a Metaphysical Metaphor
Large cardinals symbolize layers that transcend each previous layer in both size and complexity, forming an infinite sequence of transcendence. Extending this metaphor, each cardinal level (layer) is not just about infinity but an entirely new kind of infinite existence, which is crucially distinct in form. Every step in the hierarchy is not simply a quantitative leap but a qualitative shift, suggesting that the very nature of reality alters fundamentally between each cardinal. This would imply that moving from one layer to another not only changes the scale of existence but redefines its core nature.",
"An True infinite, Ever-Unfolding Narrative", 
"The Narritive Stacks
The Narritive Stack Narritive stack is a true infinite hierarchies of higher ones seeing lower one as dream.Sometimes these hierarchies can be a layer of another and that is another and another another so goes true infinitely…",
"the end, beyond all of this transcendence, there exists the Ultimate Reality. It is the truest of absolutes, being changeless, non-dual, perfect, and omnipotent. It emanates all concepts beneath it, and can never be reached, surpassed, or understood to even the slightest degree. This is true, of course, only of the reality within the particle; the transcendent structures outside of it are entirely beyond such notions of ultimate power and finality, ignoring any paradoxes or obvious logical fallacies of such a claim; this is not an exception, or a contradiction, but a matter of beyondness that cannot be explained. Can this be considered a true Ultimate Reality, then? It depends; apart from being surpassed, it meets all of the criteria for such a thing to an extent beyond the fullest, and one could make an argument that something beneath the structures beyond it can still be considered ultimate, given the sheer scope of said external structures. This, however, is best left to philosophers." (Question if ultimate reality exists. That "one could make an argument" express less confidence towards the anti-realist and or small part of cosmology.), "subatomic particles": "The smallest fraction percent negative number that is so small its beyond the concept of small and small itself * a largest number so large its above the concept of large and large itself of His powers and stats are unknown. Here is a theory   | Erased all tiers, all concept of tiers, all beyond and not a tier, tiers itself, all tiering system, all concept of tiering system, all beyond and not a tiering system, tiering system itself and everything else | surpasses, trancended, acended, above and beyond all concept of tiers and tiers itself including those that are beyond tiers, not tiers and those tiers that claims to be above Vogito" (That's why anti-realism is underrepresented. another is their inability to grasp within our reality being reality-biased.),
 "Atom In God entities contains Things Beyond" *lists as much philosophy as possible*;
2026.05.08/god-entities.fandom com/wiki/The_Truth : "there are Negativeverses and Zeroverses, proper -verse equivalents to these particles; while typically placed lower than them in cosmological hierarchies, it's worth noting that these structures are actually equal in cosmological status, with Negativeverses being equivalent to infinitesimal particles, and Zeroverses to subatomic particles.  Then there are atoms, stacked to Mega Absolute Transzthofinity on top of the lower atoms that they're made of, each layer viewing the lower as nothing more than fiction, the same way that we are beyond all of this.[2] The lowest atoms are made of subatomic particles. At the same time, there exist Qyo particles, which are largely the same as atoms but are made partly of Zeroverses as well as subatomic particles.  Finally, all of these, a limitless quantity of all of them, are contained within a single molecule, viewing them all as fodder.", 
"True Godjirapazillax, the simple wholeness of all things. He is omnipotent to the highest degree, ontologically perfect and fully actualized, while being beyond actuality in its entirety.",
[2] "Beyond all of this" barring the niche interpretation of subatomic particles.";
2026.05.08/god-entities.fandom .com/wiki/Godjirapazillax : "I tried to look away, but my eyes saw nothing but him. Not a shape. Not a form. Not an absence of form. It was a presence that never needed to be in the GOD ENTITIES. I must stop. But he won't let me. Reality isn't real. I am not real. This story is not real. And yet, he is.";
2026.05.08/beyondcosmology.fandom .com/wiki/The_Hierarchy : "Subtypes
Nested hierarchy", "Containment hierarchy
A containment hierarchy is a direct extrapolation of the nested hierarchy concept. ", "Subsumptive containment hierarchy
A subsumptive containment hierarchy is a classification of object classes from the general to the specific.", "Compositional containment hierarchy  A compositional containment hierarchy is an ordering of the parts that make up a system—the system is "composed" of these parts.[10] Most engineered structures, whether natural or artificial, can be broken down in this manner.", "In this particular example, there are also emergent properties—functions that are not seen at the lower level (e.g., cognition is not a property of neurons but is of the brain)—and a scalar quality (molecules are bigger than atoms, cells are bigger than molecules, etc.). Both of these concepts commonly exist in compositional hierarchies, but they are not a required general property. These level hierarchies are characterized by bi-directional causation.[3] Upward causation involves lower-level entities causing some property of a higher level entity; children entities may interact to yield parent entities, and parents are composed at least partly by their children. Downward causation refers to the effect that the incorporation of entity x into a higher-level entity can have on x's properties and interactions. Furthermore, the entities found at each level are autonomous."
Beyond reality-note:a

Above reality-note:v
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Omega_Omega_Omni_Omni_Higher-HyperRealitySphere : "CONTAINED BY Post-reality";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Post-reality : "CONTAINED BY The Inescapable Infinity, The Impossible Hierarchy", "Post-reality is the last "reality" to ever exist. It is beyond anything in existence, even the The Recursive Omega itself, which already trancends the Trancendence Sphere indescribably as it is far below it in hierarchy, with said Trancendence Sphere [being] beyond description and the notion of being and not being.  Post-reality is the very last thing to "exist" before The Inescapable Infinity's barrier.  Post-reality is percieved to be a plain white void, similarly to The Outside and most of Voids but on an indescribably vaster scale.  The Post-reality is not contained by anything possible or impossible, although the Inescapable Infinity exists and could be considered as containing the Post-reality. It is the last "logical" realm in existence, as it is the highest reality that still contains what could be called "logic".",
"The void extends for an incomprehensible amount of size. You could say its absolutely nothing as it trancends description, but trancendence is a different "thing" from absence.  It was calculated that there is as few as less than 2 atoms per light-year on this reality, which is contradicting as it does not have anything that could be called "space".  It is unknown whether there is any type of object other than atoms on this reality.",
"there is still Many theories about a container outside this Endless Plain Void...";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Inescapable_Infinity : "CONTAINED BY The Inescapable Infinity, The Violation", "unknown how did this Void/Object even exist in the first place", "This object might not last its containing purpose, but one thing is always certain: There is always a Larger Object Containing it, And The Larger Object Containing It Are Always Being Contained In It And So Is The Object Containing It. This Is An Absolute Fact. The Fact That The Object Contains The Larger Object Containing It And The Larger Object Containing It Has A Larger Object Containing It That It Also Contains.
The Entirety Of This Infinite Eternity Of Containment Is Known as The "Completeness"" (As opposed to Gödel's Incomplete Theorem with being complete or consistent, yet that counts only for mathematical, axiomatic systems.);
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom is .com/wiki/The_Violation : "CONTAINED BY The One Outside The Outer Boundary CONTAINS The Inescapable Infinity, The Absolute Truth of Everything And all the Original-Verse" (The Violation also contains truth meanwhile is contained by the Outside Outer Boundary.), "The Violation is an Object that Violates The True limit of The Inescapable Infinity, hence the name.",
"stated that The Violation is similar to an Original-Space where It's an existence separated and therefore outside the Transfinite and Indescribable set of Everything contained in the set or through the set of [Everything], which also includes undefinable concepts and abstract forms like the true essence of The Impossible Hierarchy. For context, it does not matter what that undefinable "thing" is as it is automatically part of [Everything] even if it is impossible to ontologically classify in any label, in any concept, in any class, in any hierarchy, in any scale, in any group, in any container and in anything that is Everything. This is because the term "Everything" that is typically used in our human language is not the same [Everything] that is refered to in this article. In other words, it is an [Everything] that encompasses what even Everything cannot.",
"Due to this, The Violation is outside of and is beyond all expression of transcendence, yet this notion fails to define it as such; to claim that The Violation is transcends all expressions of transcendence (Such as r>f) implies that The Violation is bound to transcendence, which The Violation isn't, as it renders all notions, such as those proposed by Panverse and The Allsphere completely moot before it. In other words, it cannot be defined as merely "transcendent", "boundless", "containing all things", or "inconceivable" as it is "above" such notions, including this notion, creating a recursive paradox which it also completely transcends and embodies. As such, there is no method to truly define The Violation, as it is perfectly above ineffability & in itself is ineffable. Such a notion can be imagined to repeat infinitely.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Long_Endless_Echoes_Of_An_Obsolete_Silence : "CONTAINED BY The Absolute Truth of Everything", "CONTAINS Everything, [Everything], [The Outer Boundary] and The One Outside The Outer Boundary", "[The Endless Infinite Abyss] Loosely Contains [Everything] By Simply Being Outside Of Them. These Include The Lowest of Undefinable Transcendental Objects Such as The Creator, to The Highest of [Objects] Like The Violation",
"This abyss is completely indescribable. While the outlines of The Violation that we can scratch may be ineffably boundless, this abyss can simply not be reached by outline whatsoever.  It is unreachable "in a way" that no container can outline its.  Just as paradoxes are gaps in logic outlined by language, The Violation is an inaccessible & ineffable boundlessness that is outlined by The Violation.  In other words, this entire article is a dummy explanation trying to explain to you that this entire exercise in efforts to create an object "greater" than The Violation does not exist, not exist, or anything else that may be used to classify it in a way that somehow is outside The Violation's "scope".";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Absolute_Truth_of_Everything : "Rather than a fictional construct like most articles here, this page will be talking about a hypothetical that we will call "The Absolute Truth of Everything". This hypothetical is more of an exploration rather than creative writing (Although it still somewhat is).
The name "The Absolute Truth of Everything" is the abstract notion of [The 4 Categories]
It is the notion that "Truth" is and can be described into 4 categories: The Subjective, Objective, Abjective, and Superjective.
The Subjective focuses on the subjective aspect of existence, of one's own consciousness.
The Objective focuses on external facts, of the reality outside one's own mind. It focuses on ontology and meontology.
The Abjective focuses on the existence of something that is real, something that is neither truth, falsehoods, and traditional ontological & meontological categorization.
Superjective focuses on both The Objective and Subjective.",
""Logical Ineffability Argument", which logically explains the "existence" is ineffable constructs that is neither existent and nonexistent.",
Infinite Transcendence Argument: "one can logically "conceptualize" a "thing" that is infinitely transcendent into infinite layers layered infinitely into each other in an infinite recursive loop of infinite transcendence.
It is with this logic that makes conceptualizing entities "beyond" "The Absolute Truth of Everything" especially difficult, as it can be argued that they are simply part of yet another layer to the infinite self-recursive, self-referential, infinitely repeating pattern of infinitely layered ineffable "transcendence"." (It reminds me of fundamentalism, circular loop and infinite regress in Agrippa's trilemma about justification of knowledge.), "illogically and paradoxically layer non-standard types of transcendance. Transcendances that simply do not fit under the typical understanding of transcendance. It is simply beyond all definition, logic, and more, yet somehow, we have found an abyss where the ineffable is. It is a gap in existence formed around logic, yet is, and persists to "be" in some way that does not follow Subjective nor Abjective truth.",
"It is for this reason that any proposition or conjecture simply fails to reach its "truth", because once again, our language is limited to only 1s and 0s (Existence & Nonexistence), and fails to keep up with th ineffable, which distinctly neither lacks or has any such quality, trait, or attribute.";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Complete_Hierarchy : "There are even more verses to be made.",
"Tier : Post-Finalion [Breaking Down What Tiers Are Meant To Be]   This is a level of ineffability that has somehow been "organized" into this tier.  3.The Autarchic Non-Subject 
2.The Absolute Truth 
1.The Absolute Form of Everything";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Reality_6200 : "CONTAINED BY Itself, The Absolute Truth of Everything CONTAINS N/A"
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Impossible_Hierarchy : "CONTAINED BY The Omniglobe, The Inescapable Infinity CONTAINS The Unfathomable and The Foundation";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Omniglobe : "CONTAINED BY The Master Omni Globe", "Omniglobe is [Reality]. Nothing within The Omniglobe can exist outside it, if it is not transcendent or created by a Transcendite. If anything within it that's not trancendent, let's say The Box, escapes The Omniglobe, it will be cease to exist, since it does not have any method to exist beyond definition and describability. The Omniglobe is really big, but it isn't the biggest.  And even if they can exist outside of [Reality], they would have to first break out of [Reality], which is a feat that is impossibly difficult, even to beings such as the true essence of [The Impossible Hierarchy]  The Omniglobe is so large and even contains the impossible hierarchy, it’s the entirety of reality except for a few things. It’s just so big, anything that's not trancendent that leaves is destroyed because of its [Reality]. The beings outside are the strongest known.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Master_Omni_Globe : "CONTAINED BY Creepyverse", "one of the largest verses";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Creepyverse : "CONTAINED BY Gameverse Or Reality Sphere";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Gameverse : "CONTAINED BY The is and Reality Sphere", "Gameverse is Structure/Verse Created By The Omnayer which is the former Largest Object in the Entire Wiki, But it was Recently Beaten by the Reality Sphere.", "It supposed to be uncontainable since its the biggest structure in the Wiki (Which is not true Since it recently beaten by larger spheres/Realities)";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_is : "The True Beyond is the largest reality that was known for some time. It contains Gameverses and is contained by itself or Ses.", "CONTAINED BY Ses, The Is";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Ses : "CONTAINED BY Susverse", "LIFE R E A L I T Y  Ses is the place where Crewmates stay when they are in their lobby. Usually there is a host that can define everything inside a Ses.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Susverse : "CONTAINED BY No", "Susverses are verses that are very close to voids with the only thing they contain as a single identical copy of universeverse in the very center. Some advanced civilizations tried to explore Susverses but abandoned their ships and probes in the void because of nothing being there, so susverses are full of abandoned ships and junk.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/No : "CONTAINED BY Y E S" < ;...; < 2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User:CompactStar/pages/Nothingness?useskin=fandomdesktop < ; ... ; < 2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Final_Void : "CONTAINED BY Incomverse"..."final void can also incinerate almost anything that goes in it, besides people with omnipotence, omnipresence, etc. The final void has a peculiar set of physics even compared to other verses and phases in and out of reality every couple of seconds. The Final Void also goes on beyond “no end at all” if you go down, almost like a hole in space time."; < 
2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Incomverse : "is an insanely vast verse that has many amazing things inside it. Incom meaning “incomprehensible”, it has very weird physics and is very hard to comprehend for most people. It is almost like a giant verse full of cool stars and celestial objects that are not found in other verses. The incomverse is a very weird verse however and has some physics that don’t make sense. There are also some unstable parts of the incomverse, and these unstable parts phase in and out of existence. Some of these objects do not follow the laws of physics like perfect spheres with infinite faces. There is little known information about the incomverse.",
"Contains: Everything  Contained By: The Vast Majority of Everything"; < 2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Vast_Majority_of_Everything : "Vast Majority of Everything (TVMOE) is a concept that transcends the limits of our everyday understanding, representing an ultimate reality where every conceivable thing, idea, and potentiality finds its being. It's not a physical location you could point to on a map, nor is it a contained space within some larger entity. Instead, it's the all-encompassing "that which is," the foundational ground from which everything — from the most tangible object to the most fleeting thought — emerges. Imagine every universe, every dimension, every dream, every unexpressed possibility, and every fundamental law of nature; all of these, and infinitely more, are woven into the fabric of this boundless sphere. It's the ultimate 'container' that, paradoxically, has no boundaries and requires no external container itself, because there is literally nothing outside of it."; 
2026.02.06/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Inaccessable_Hierachy : "The Last Biggest Thing [Class Absolute Infinity]]   The Vast Majority of Everything" | 
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Is : "CONTAINED BY Pitch Black The Is is. Do not enter. The Is is outside of Existence, Infinity, or any area at all. It is surrounded by Pitch Black. Paul did not create it, it was there before he was. The Is defies all laws of time, space, multidimensionality and science. The All-Creator is unaware of its existence, because The Is hid itself behind a veil of darkness that us mortals call Pitch Black, which no being can cross because The Is is contained by a quantum flux lock (a lock with an infinite amount of combinations per millisecond) protecting itself.", "The Is itself is conscious and a living thing."; < 
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Pitch_Black : "CONTAINED BY Universeverse, Quantumverse", "The end. This void is the last thing ever. None will ever reach it. Jonathan, Paul, QWERTY, Diana, Charles, Alper, noone will. And yes, our lord and savior BONGUS will not ever reach it as well."; < 
Universeverse: 2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Universeverse : "CONTAINED BY Loopholeverse and The Higher Lands, or Universeverseverse CONTAINS Reality",
"Universeverse is the ABSOLUTE reason that everything exists.", "created all cosmic/omnipotent/beyond omnipotent/etc entities, all verses that can self contain, it breaks all rules, and overall, the universeverse is the biggest "verse" that can possibly exist.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Loopholeverse : "KARDASHEV SCALE COMMUNISM", "CONTAINED BY Esrevinu, COMMUNISM", "Loopholeverse is not just a verse, but also a species of skilled ERRORverses that eventually evolved and figured out ways to escape almost every End-All-Be-All.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Esrevinu : "CONTAINED BY Esrevitlum", "Esrevinu is pretty much an inverted version of the Universe, but is also bigger. Like, indescribably bigger.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Esrevitlum : "CONTAINED BY The Inverse, Esrevesrevinu, or Esrevatem", "The Esrevitlum is an absolutely hypothetical object with no proof of existence, but it's also one of the only plausible ideas for what contains the Esrevinu, so as of now, this is what we THINK contains the Esrevinu.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Inverse : "CONTAINED BY It's currently unknown what it is contained by - Just kidding. It's contained by The Outverse", "The Inverse is an entity that grows to the size of whatever the biggest verse is, thus meaning that it will always be the biggest entity. As of now, it is currently unknown what limits the inverse has, but it has shown a few weaknesses";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Outverse : "If one [Tells] The Inverse of this verse's existence, the concept of your existence will be sent to The Shadow Realm, where one will experience darkness beyond what a physical form would have been capable of.  Some old traditionalists claim that The Outverse is the biggest and anything containing this verse is not actually real.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Shadow_Realm : "CONTAINED BY The Light Realm CONTAINS The Inverse, The Outverse  The Shadow Realms are the places Everything goes when they die or get erased from existence. No matter if they're in heaven, hell, limbo, or any afterlife, this "Place" contains all of those afterlifes. Most just can't percieve it as it is the empty darkness where those afterlifes are constructed within. The Shadow Realm is a non-living realm, only those above True God can create and destroy The Shadow Realm.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Light_Realm : "CONTAINED BY The Grey Area", "The Light Realm is where you absolutely live. It's pretty much the opposite of The Shadow Realm in absolutely every single way. For example, this realm is bright, while The Shadow Realm is dark, etc.  It is where all the "[Living]" exist. This includes entities that transcend their physical body. Since they have yet to perish or be erased from existence, they remain within the infinite objects contained by this object.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/%E2%80%B9The_Grey_Area%E2%80%BA?useskin=fandomdesktop : "Contained by The Multi-Realm", "The grey area is the container for the Light and Shadow Realms. It is grey, due to the fact that it must have two ends of a spectrum. It is however not gray on the traditional logic, as it is both boundlessly bright and dark on a conceptual level despite not containing any light or darkness. It represents what neither of the opposite ends produce yet also what they do. No other colors can exist here, and no light can enter or be produced within the Grey area.", "Time experienced in The Grey Area is illusory and fake, yet most time-bound entities will mistake it for reality. The same goes for the space you will tread on. Most people who have gone here return mentally broken, because they have spent, in their perspective, several billion millennias, while in reality they have spent a "time" so stretched out it could not even be defined with "Eternity".";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Multi-Realm : "CONTAINED BY Inter-Realm Spaces", "Multi-Realm is a collection of all realms ever. It represents absolutely everything; Zero can be represented by The Grey Area, Negative Numbers can be represented by the infinite hierarchy of The Shadow Realms, and Positive Numbers can be represented by the infinite hierarchy of The Light Realms. This applies to everything, actually, as everything has an opposite as well as something inbetween.", "infinitely and inaccessibly beyond normal verses who trancend the concept of spacetime and [dimensionality].";...; < 2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Space_of_Spaces : "CONTAINED BY Space-Ception", "AGE Absolute Infinity LIFE Absolute Infibity", "space of spaces can be said to be empty on an extreme scale.  One thing special about the space of spaces is that it is a space of inter-realm spaces(es), meaning, it is a space of space of spaces.  A theory says that this is space of space of...(absolute infibity times)...of space of spaces. But it was disproved, because it does not prove anything significant.";
2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Space-Ception : "CONTAINED BY The Unlimited Blankness", "Sometimes there are rogue Space-Ceptions which only contains something bigger than it instead of getting contained by The Unlimited Blankness.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Unlimited_Blankness : "CONTAINED BY The Water Bottle", "reality, the perception of the Unlimited Blankness as a white space is simply an attempt by the mind to conceptualize something that cannot be analyzed.", "no reason to be bigger than space-ception, but due to existing beyond the traditional Axioms of space-ception, it simply bypasses such notions and trancends space-ception infinitely. The Unlimited Blankness is beyond logic and it cannot be defined since its blank space does not possess things such as "Definition" or "Description" due to being so large that definitions and concepts fail to encompass it.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Water_Bottle : "CONTAINED BY The Oceanic Oasis, Glass Container";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Oceanic_Oasis : "CONTAINED BY Anti-Melting Substance", "The Oceanic glass container contains all WATER ever and is made up of infinite verses called The Water Bottle. In this area is located several Omega Fish, Omega Sharks, and the strongest/biggest creature known here, the Omega Whale. It has a massive tear in it called The Tear in Reality.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Anti-Melting_Substance : "CONTAINED BY Infibit Lava";...;
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Infibit_Emptiness : "CONTAINED BY Absolute Infibity", "Infibit Emptiness is the only entity that has escaped the core of the Infibit World, and controls all nothingness that has ever nonexisted. It contains all void's and nothings, like;    Absolute Nothingness Nothing Pitch Black Pitch White The Void The Antivoid etc. The only objects currently known to not be contained by the Infibit Emptiness are The Impossible Thing, The Eternal Chaos, Nonthing, and Etc.  The Infibit Emptiness is the absolute controller of everything in the Infibit chain and can replace molecules with pure nothingness extremely easily, as in whenever he wants to think.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Absolute_Infibity : "CONTAINED BY The Trancendence Spheres", "Absolute Infibity is a huge reality containing verses of all sizes, including The Infibit Emptiness. In fact, most    of the voids in Absolute Infibity ARE The Infibit Emptiness.  The structure of Absolute Infibity is mostly unknown, and it is still unknown if it even has any organized structure at all. All that is certain is that this verse is... MASSIVE." < ;...; 2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Epicverse : "CONTAINED BY The Eternal Land" ; 
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Eternal_Land : "CONTAINED BY The Land of Dreams"; Dreams > ; 2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Infinite_Parallel_Lands : "KARDASHEV SCALE [Dream]", "AGE [Dream]", "Just like The Epic, it has an indescribable property, which is called only as [Dream].  [Dream] takes the form of a red dot with 1 graphical dimensions that trancends up to the first 10 dimensional measurements.";...; < 2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Cubic_Graph : "CONTAINED BY The Axis CONTAINS The Grid" < ; 2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Axis : "CONTAINED BY The ∞D Graph of Reality CONTAINS The Cubic Graph and all other graph dimensions.", "Layer 12 is the strangest graph. It doesn't have a graph name because it goes beyond the 11 layer confines of dimensions (11+11 dimensions), but it can be described. Basically, layer 12 is the collection of all other infinite measurements of parallel timelines. It is currently unknown how this is possible, but there are several theories on it.";
< 2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Infinity_Dimensional_Graph_of_Reality : "CONTAINED BY The Higher Lands, R E A L I T Y" (Loops at Higher Lands.);
2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/R_E_A_L_I_T_Y : "CONTAINED BY Uros, God of Reality And Reality Barrier CONTAINS None",
"What is Beyond?   Everything and Nothing, Everything inside Everything Outside, All knowing and all endless, Reality is why your here, Reality is where everything stands, The only confinement is Nothing, Outside of Reality is always, Nothing I wish i could explain it better,Outside of Beyond is a black void of spacetime in which nothing can enter or get out of, Nothing can contain it except Nothingness itself", "Beyond has a barrier(?) that appears physically as a large colorless(?) box around the "Reality Sphere", But you can only see this wall if you "touch" it. Its said that if the "Reality Barrier" and especially "Reality Sphere" Didnt Exist, Every single body and verse would float off into the absolute nothingness and disintegrate, It is said that Doge Created the Barrier cause he knew the dangers of Outside of Reality/Reality Sphere. It is said that outside of the reality wall is nothing, No Atoms, No Light, NOTHING", "Doge Theory is not proven, Many have speculated a god of reality, Which can ultimately control reality itself, Though this theory isnt proven,", "There may be a god playing with beyond, and we just dont know it  People have called this god Uros, God of Reality. And he is believed to be the most powerful god if he does exist (for now)."; <
2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Uros,_God_of_Reality : "Why is there barely any info?   We dont even know if he exists and if he does he would most likely change reality so people wouldnt know he existed.", "POWER One of the most power gods if not the most powerful KNOWLEDGE Infinite NUMBER OF THINGS CREATED Possibly All of reality itself, Unknown",
"most likely control R E A L I T Y And be the one thats maintaining Reality Barrier  He would even know what is causing things to disintegrate and what lies in the Outside of Reality."; |
COMMUNISM: 2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Marcon28/The_Good : "CONTAINED BY The Turtle";
2026.02.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Turtle : "CONTAINED BY The Real God", "Contains All Cubelevels, verselevels and galactic levels (example: Universe is contained by Universe Cluster/Multiverse, star is located in galaxy) Created by The Real God Himself. The REAL First Creation of Him.";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Godplex : "CONTAINED BY Heavenplex, Green Ring, Bignoseverse",
"Contained by: Heavenplex, Type Absolute Infinity Civilization, R E A L I T Y, AHHHHHHHHHHH!!! (i ain't typing that)...";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Heavenplex : "That's the only data our team has collected...";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Exavingintillliogooglepleixatnthrombihexarealdamidecazetovenwekawekopetaxenoverse : "CONTAINS Undetermined";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Universeverseverse : "CONTAINED BY Universemega";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Universemega : "Contained by Avtaverse";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Avtaverse ;
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Bevvgtaverse : "next is Ceanataverse";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Ceanataverse ;
2026.05.02/
beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Desytaverse : "Its a verse Enscendraverse";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Enscendraverse : "next is : Fesquestraverse";
2026.05.02/
beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Fesquestraverse ;
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Gatexttraverse : "Next is Huiitraverse" not linked. 2 comments; <
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Blog:Recent_posts : 2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Huittraverse : 2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Goosemaroo2014/Iotraverse : Verse);
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User:CompactStar/pages/Verse?useskin=fandomdesktop : "verse is an object with laws (Although there are exceptions).", "All verses will have a gravitational attraction. They also must have a Finality Index and Existence Rank, by definition." |
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Quantumverse : "CONTAINED BY The Beyond";
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Beyond;
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Source : "CONTAINED BY The Foundation CONTAINS Higher Laws of All-Reality, Pitch Black, and The Philosopher" < ;
2026.05.02/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Foundation : "CONTAINED BY The Impossible Hierarchy CONTAINS The Source and Other Philosophers" (CONTAINED BY Gameverse Or Reality Sphere, Gameverse: "The is and Reality Sphere", CONTAINED BY Ses, The Is, The Is: leads to individual Universe-chain: "Universemega": "Contained by Avtaverse"..."Gatexttraverse": "Next is Huiitraverse" > ..."Verse"/Existence and Finalty, Ses: leads to The Vast Majority of Everything, which Absolute Truth of Everything presumingly contains, which is contained by the Absolute Form of Everything conceptually and in a lesser degree contained by a something called The Violation because it is a thing included by everything.);
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Hypercosmic_Ocean_of_Realities : "CONTAINED REALMS Allsphere   Allsphere Wave   Crossover Rift" ; 2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Allsphere : "CONTAINED REALMS Omniboxeplex CONTAINING REALMS Allsphere Wave   Crossover Rift   Hypercosmic Ocean of Realities", "highest level Allsphere in a stack is referred to as the Apex Allsphere. Apex Allspheres are made up of Flow Particles, which is what allows them to contain all of the components needed to make up a Flow Narrative.  The Allsphere is the final cosmological container within a Flow Narrative before these cosmologies eventually combine through a process called Allsphere Amalgamation.  Allspheres are created by the Allsphere Weaver within the Hypercosmic Ocean of Realities."; ... ; > 2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Archboxeplex_Chain : "CONTAINED REALMS Boxeplex   All Archboxeplexes within the Archboxeplex Chain";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Boxeplex : "CONTAINED REALMS Box   Archbox Chain   Omnibox CONTAINING REALMS Archboxeplex Chain   Omniboxeplex";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Box : "CONTAINED REALMS Cosmolarch";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Cosmolarch : "CONTAINED REALMS Transcendentem Continuum   Cosmolarchan Haven";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Transcendentem_Continuum : "CONTAINED REALMS Transcendentem   Depriverse";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Transcendentem : "CONTAINED REALMS Beyond Bubble CONTAINING REALMS Transcendentem Continuum";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Beyond_Bubble : "CONTAINED REALMS Monocosm   Infinicosm   Omnicosm", "CONTAINING REALMS Transcendentem";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Monocosm : "CONTAINED REALMS Outside Bubble CONTAINING REALMS Omnicosm   Beyond Bubble";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Outside_Bubble : "CONTAINED REALMS Omniverse   Godverse",
"CONTAINING REALMS Monocosm   Infinicosm   Omnicosm";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Omniverse : "CONTAINED REALMS Ultraverse" (I took the reverse route. Basically Flow Narrative is the highest container as article.);
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Flow_Narrative : "A Flow Narrative contains an infinite number of Flow Pyramids.  Work in progress";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Hierarchy_of_Realms : "Post-Terminal Supracosmic Spacetime";
2026.05.08/god-entities.fandom .com/wiki/Microcosmology_(GE) : "Z Particles.. Contains a place, because this “place” cannot even be classified as a “place”) that “transcends” Because this place exists outside of literally everything, Including the concept of nothingness or anything else has no meaning, Not even the concept of "Outside" Doesnt Exist in the Z Particle because it is outside of everything including the things not made yet because it is outside the concept of "New" And etc etc. As in fact It create a realm outside of everything and even beyond the concept of “everything” where even the concept of beyond nothingness doesnt exist within this realm and not even the concept of “true nothing” and beyond the concept of “true nothing” this won’t apply as nothing can truly exist for Z Particles, Including ztho itself and solos all verses.", Zitho particle;
2026.05.08/god-entities.fandom .com/wiki/The_Yucek-i_Sutrk : "beyond all things, It contains all hierarchies and cosmologies regardless on their stack and power. It goes beyond the concept of any container, verse, structure and everything in general and generally the truth of everything, everything is a part of The Yucek i Sutrk.", "Yucek i Sutrk is not merely beyond GE cosmology; it is beyond that and goes further. It surpasses all quantitative and qualitative limits, existing in a state of absolute transcendence." (So not beyond transcendence?) "You will not be able to create a cosmology stronger than this, because any cosmology will by default be inside The Yucek i Sutrk, regardless of whether you want it or not.
It is the almost true end point to The Entire God Entities..." (Almost absolute.);
2026.05.08/beyondcosmology.fandom .com/wiki/The_Infinite_Hierarchy : "Beyond The Cosmos (10th Class)   Unimaginably unimaginable  Cosmic Complex (without barrier) Complex System The Error Hyperspace of Systems Collection of Hyperspaces The Omega Black Hole Omega Void Omega Spiral The Redirection Ultima Loop The Paradoxical Infinity Warning! This Is A Fork of The Complete Hierarchy, So The Revamp 2.0 Will Be Coming Soon"


Above reality-note:a

Reality hierarchy-note:v
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Complete_Hierarchy : "complete hierarchy of every object on this wiki, and an improved version of the Nexus and The Ultimate Hierarchy.", "The marcus hierarchy The ultimate hierarchy (Old complete hierarchy) Gods of the beyond (Character hierarchy from TCH, W.I.P) Badly translated verse hierarchy The character hierarchy The impossible hierarchy The blizzard sub-hierarchy My hierarchy The hierarchy of the numbers";
2026.05.14/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Template:The_Complete_Hierarchy/2 : "Pre-Boxes  The Outside - Monocosm - Altarca - The Grand Void Boxes Chain  Mini Box - The Box - The Megabox - The Ultrabox - The Extremebox Existence Chain  Existence - Metaexistence - Xenoexistence - Infinity Void Chain  Void - Supervoid - Metavoid - Ultravoid - Xenovoid - Hypervoid - Omnivoid - Blue Void - Red Void Higher Lands  Pitch Black - The True Box - Reality 1 < 2 > 3";
2025.05.14/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Template:The_Complete_Hierarchy/3 : "Dreamed of Lands  The Eternal Land - The Land of Dreams - The Infinite Parallel Lands Mathematical Concept Chain  The Grid - The Cubic Graph - The Axis - The Infinite Dimensional Graph of Reality Omni-type  The Higher Lands - The Law Manipulators - The Omnayer" Omnayer still is contained by impossible hierarchy when following the container-section.
;
Nexus: "updated version, see The Complete Hierarchy";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Gods_of_the_beyond : "Beyond Hierarchal Estimation   Any Being on the Same Level As The Violation";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Badly_translated_verse_hierarchy : 2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User:CompactStar/pages/ZUCC?useskin=fandomdesktop : "Contained by ZUCC Contains Jvofverses";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Complete_Entity_Hierarchy : "Complete Entity Hierarchy! As an analog to The Complete Hierarchy, this is the hierarchy of every entity on this wiki. Each entity next on the list is higher on the Kardashev Scale than the last.", "Beyond Kardeshev Scale   Beyond Kardeshev Civilization The Truth"; < 2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Truth : "The Truth
There are many gods, but they are numerous. Many claim to be the true, one, pure creator of the Universe verse, but do we really know who? The Truth is stranger, and yet simpler: They all are.
Yeah, you heard it right
The Truth, the purest and simplest, is that there is only one true god, God himself. What about the other gods? Playboy Carti, The Omni-Being, the All-Creator? They are all versions of him. All Gods that are 'creators of everything' are just people's ways of imagining him." ;
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Repeated_Hierarchy_Chain : "Final Tier   The Last Hierarchy  Beyond Existence  The Complete Hierarchy Next one is Inaccessible Paradox chain";
2025.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Beyond_Kardeshev_Civilization : "ENTITIES N/A, Everything, Nothing, ??? ENERGY USAGE ꄺ (Absolutely Everything And Everything That Can Be Considered Absolutely Beyond Everything) CONTROLS Post-Everything, Everything, & Nothing (Holds The Complete Hierarchy)  This is an untouchable civilization that cannot be categorized in the kardeshev scale as it completely trancends the parameters of the Kardeshev Scale where a civilization has "Control" over Everything.", ""post-everything".", "How Do Civilizations Trancend The Kardeshev Scale?   They do not. This is due to the fact that a "Civilization" is part of everything, and nothing in everything can reach this point. If they [do], they are no longer what can be ontologically classified as a "civilization"."; <
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Astrean_Civilization : "KARDASHEV SCALE The Autarchic Non-Subject REIGNS The Physical and Corporeal layer of Astrea and perhaps even the metaphysical layer of Astrea", "page is going to be a gateway between Beyond Universe Wiki (BU) wiki and Legends of Supracosm Wiki (LOTS)   This is the Astrean Civilization, the sole civilization that dominates over the corporeal body of the center of the Autarchic Non-Subject they called "Astrea".";
2026.05.03/legends-of-the-supracosm.fandom .com/wiki/Hierarchy_of_Realms : "Class 8 [Final Class]  Supracosm Supracosmic External Barrier Post-Terminal Supracosmic Spacetime Class M - Miscellaneous  Hubverse Pocket Realm Microverse Microdepriverse Antireality Void";
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Category:Inaccessible_Paradox : "The ALL chain";
2026.05.03/beyondcosmology.fandom .com/wiki/The_Official_Hierarchy : "Class 7 and onward, see The Extended Hierarchy.",
"This is The Official Hierarchy of the All Dimensions Wiki! In which, you can navigate through the long chain of verses, structures, realms and voids from the smallest thing to the largest made so far!
This hierarchy, an offshoot from the now defunct Complete Hierarchy and an attempt to ease this drama, takes the longest route from the Universe to the largest thing made so far, including some of the most visited pages in this fandom.", Miner's chain: "Pre-chain  Cetaverse", ... Tier Four: "Bignoseverse",...
"Post-HUBs  V Trueverse The Drum  The Drum";
2026.05.03/beyondcosmology.fandom .com/wiki/The_Extended_Hierarchy : "Class-7: Cetaverse to The Absolute Everything";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Trueverse : "CONTAINED BY The Drum, but sometimes The Ultimate Box";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Boxspace : "CONTAINED BY Broxspacees, Blueboxes" (Broxspacees isn't linked and no search results except this article itself.);
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Bluebox : "CONTAINED BY Boxfinity" (not linked),
"Bluebox is a box contains Absolute Fictional Numbers Boxspaces, if the boxspace was not containing itself infinite times then Bluebox will just  contain Inaccessible Cardinal Boxspaces and it’s a cardinal less than Absolute Infinity."; <
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Number_Hierarchy : "The Number Hierarchy: Chapter 1", "Boxfinity", "Lastius Memorius";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Number_Hierarchy/Post-Numeric_Realm : "[reality: dead. existence: futile.] - FINAL 7...",
"DEFINITION: The End Of Everything Is A Number So Unbelievably Large That It Can't Be Described In Words! Can It Be Surpassed? Nobody Knows!",
"	•	Emile: WHO'S READY TO GO BEYOND?!
* TMO: ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME
* Gavinnusz: ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME
* Emile: Then On To Chapter 3!";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Number_Hierarchy/Bypassing_Of_The_End :  "The End of Everything", "DEFINITION: The End Of Everything Is A Number So Unbelievably Large That It Can't Be Described In Words! Can It Be Surpassed? Nobody Knows!",
"Advanced Everythingology Begins   POST-ENDING NUMBER", "EvG|2.0"
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Marcus_hierarchy : "Class (REDACTED): Beyond existence conceptuality   The cosmological breakthrough"; <
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_incomprehensible_limit : "CONTAINED BY Nothing. But the 'thing' outside the incomprehensible limit is called The cosmological breakthrough.", "The incomprehensible limit is the actual true limit of all realities, and civilizations have trying to go further for an infinite amount of time. Escaping the incomprehensible limit has been a fantasy for the most powerful The beyond entities for a very long time. The incomprehensible limit contains all objects physically possible. Now at first glance, this might just be one of those pages created for the sake of big pages, but still. The incomprehensible limit is the absolute FINAL. Anyone that even tries to go farther gets incinerated from existence just by the smallest physical interaction with the incomprehensible limits border." ;
2026.05.03/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_cosmological_breakthrough : "cosmological breakthrough, also known as "the breakthrough" is a place outside The Incomprehensible Limit and the place the corrupted inhabit. The only way an object can move its position outside of the incomprehensible limit is to move into a unstable part of reality and no-clip to the other side of The Incomprehensible limit. Conceptual existence and the laws of physics are completely undefined, and to this day The beyond entities don't understand how they work. Although there have been a few photographs of stars outside The Incomprehensible limit, they have unfortunately been lost and/or destroyed.", "'space' is still a space, its value is not definable. Any value within the cosmological breakthrough is not definable or expressable, which is one of the many variables that may cause corruption. As referring to the above headings, it has law, physics, and existence, but their value is not ontologically classifiable nor are they expressable (undefined).", "space is one of the very few 'meta-conceptual' spaces known, as they have been proven to 'exist', but are undefined & inexpressable.";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Meta-Hierarchy : "Meta-Hierarchy (TMH) is a hierarchy ranking the objects equal to or greater than the Wikiverse in size.  Due to the immense size of the objects in The Meta-Hierarchy, we need a new system of measuring objects, the Meta-Class[1]. Based on the Class system from previous hierarchies, the Meta-Class is far bigger than any quantity of regular Classes[2]. The difference between a leap from a Class to a bigger Class is vastly[3] smaller than the leap from a Meta-Class to a bigger Meta-Class.", "ᛞ Terminal Meta-Class (10) ᛞ - [Versal Structures]", "The Finality of All Verses", "Finale  The Terminality of all Verses (Meta-Class Terminator) The Hexagonal Void (Meta-Class Verse)";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Extended_Meta-Hierarchy : "Xeno-structure Chain  Xeno cosmic truth True Xenoverse The Xeno virtual machine The Xeno Computer The Xeno Earth The Xeno Universe The True Xeno-Box The Xeno Wikiverse For more see The Post-Meta Hierarchy";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Drum : "Drum is truly nothing but another verse on this wiki that people keep on adding to. Will it stop? Will it end? No one truly knows. But at least we don’t have an archverse chain now.";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Extended_Hierarchy : "𝚺 Supremumia Class 𝚺 (15)fictional structures", "True Waterfall, the class terminator of Supremumia, and a stepping stone to The Clock in the Finality Chain. This is technically the last verse that is actually in TEH, since Finality Chain is not ", "The Final Existence The Final Barrier The Final Void The Final Limbo The Final Superposition The Final Chaos"..."True Waterfall"
"Ω Finality Chain (Diasemipostic Psuedo-Class) Ω   The Finality Chain is a series of containers that each increase in Finality Index from the previous. They are (for the most part, with some exceptions) much, much larger than anything beforehand and also very distinctive, which is why they belong on a separate list. Almost all of of them also start with the word "The."", "It should be noted that this is not class 16 and isn't a class in general. The Finality Chain is also not the successor to Class 15, despite its placement", "The Wheel For more, see Everything Layers and the Post-Hierarchy.";
< When clicking what contains by the last of the first below (15)fictional structures, then 2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_True_Waterfall : "CONTAINED BY: If you want to go through the Finality Chain then go to the Clocks, however this assumes that TTW is fully definable with finite properties, however most verses are not." (Convergence if this is final or something beyond.), "True Waterfall is the final verse of TEH and is basically a giant waterfall with a bunch of verses inside. Many new verses, most that have properties indescribable in the English language, form here.  This verse is very similar in a bunch of ways to the Waterfall, however this is because the biggest verse with an existing page when the TOG that created The True Waterfall WAS The Waterfall.";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Post-Hierarchy : "Next part is the Extended-Post Hierarchy.";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Extended_Post-Hierarchy : "If you haven't noticed yet, all logic is completely gone by this point.", "DreamsPS4 Chain", "Multidreamverse";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Template:Hierarchies/0 : "Pre-Hierarchies  The Pre-Hierarhcy (Classes -4 to 0)", "Multi and Hecto Hierarchies  The Multi-Hierarchy (Classes 96 to 106) Underline - Class that is not released.";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Pre-Hierarchy : 0--4 "First Nonexistent", "Anti Logic (true) True nothing (true)" (Both alldimensions and beyond-universe has more positive pro-reality-classes rather than minus-anti-reality-classes.);
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Special:Search?query=%22The+Post-Extended+Hierarchy%22 : Users seem enthusiastic about the next levels meanwhile the negative levels are ignored.;
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User:11sD_Tile/Pre-Absorb?useskin=fandomdesktop : "Classes -400 to -390: The Extended Mutli-Pre-Hierachy (H-20): TEMPH"...
"The NEVER Terminus Absolute-Infinite Hierachy (H⍰+⨀+Ω): TNTAIH", "More Fandoms Fantasy Sci-fi";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Everything_Layer : -20-17 (Biased towards slightly at -3.) From true nothing to above "godity can't make contradictions. This place has power breaks ALL concepts.".;
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Uneverything_Layer : "Seventh Anti-Uneverything Layer" 7-23.5 (Positive-number biased.) "23rd Uneverything Layer   Real reality 23.5th Uneverything Layer   The Sierpínski triangle Footnotes   ↑ Everything Layers that are comprised of objects smaller than The Drum, the biggest object in The Official Hierarchy. ↑ A being with potent psychic abilities, better known as psychics. For bigger than it, see Xenoeverything Layer, Absolute Uneverything Layer. For weaker than it, see Everything Layer, Absolute Everything Layer.";
2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/List_of_hierarchical_articles : 2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Hierarchy_Hierarchy : "The Super Hierarchy (SH1) SuperClasses 1 to TBA (currently at 4)",
"The Super-Hierarchy is a Super-Hierarchy (not a normal hierarchy) that strictly and paradoxically is unable to be contained by EABA verses and over (including Final fractalism and Totum) and is used as a post-totum hierarchy (thus its a super hierarchy. NOT A NORMAL ONE). If a verse says they contain the super-hierarchy (NOT A NORMAL HIERARCHY), then they don’t contain the super-hierarchy (NOT A- you get the point.) in actuality.", "OmniClass 1: The Total>>   Final Fractalism Ultimate Fractalism Totum Treneversei Vltra The Cake of Cakes The World of Everything and Everywhere The Biggest Violation Ever" (When this hierarchy goes beyond The Violation, which is below The Absolute Form of Everything, then this page ascends beyond-universe.), "𒀭 OmniClass 4 𒀭 : “The Imperceivable World”>>" 3. alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Boundless_Plane : "It hasn't been proven, but one of the most likely theories is that The Boundless Plane is the opposite of Anti Logic", The Silent Plane 2026.05.03/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Silent_Plane : "Silent Plane does not reference anything that text can even allude to. It is not "beyond", because it has no relation to that. There is no "transcendence", no "existence", no "interaction", and no relation to anything that can be named. It's just nothing, and the "closest" thing we have to it is just pure silence: "". See these empty quotations? This is the quote without any text, describing absolutely nothing because it doesn't even try to describe it. A simplification would be the void with absence of words, the absence of text, the absence of meaning, the absence of reality, the absence of philosophy, the absence of reasoning, and the absence of being referred to at all, and even the absence of this outlining, and even the absence of absence and other concepts itself. Nothing comes from this, nothing exists in this, but it is still irrelevant. The only thing that can get one closer to this, is throwing out all labels you have and experiencing the blankness, which is the closest thing in the whole existence to this. It cannot be fought, because there is nothing to fight. It doesn't have any property, as it is beyond these. It is not even a category error, as it has nothing to do with any philosophical arguments. It cannot exist, as it is nothing to the concept of existence. It cannot be paradoxical, but it is nothing to the concept of paradoxes.",
"It hasn't been proven, but one of the most likely theories is that The Silent Plane is the opposite of True Nothing",
"Maybe it should be called "Not-that-Is", existing as the opposite of It-That-Is, but even saying that would be an inaccuracy.  As repeated again, anything that is said about this is inaccurate, and even this is inaccurate. The Silent Plane is the third Iteration above us, casting it’s predecessor, the Boundless Plane."
below "Iteration": "FIRST ITERATION was what most knew. Observable. Finite in its comprehension. The SECOND ITERATION contained it wholly, as a vessel contains water without knowing the ocean. The SECOND was UNOBSERVABLE REALITY the vast, unseeable totality from which the FIRST had been carved, not by intent, but by the splitting of a single layer. One layer only. The depths below that layer remained untouched and from those depths the THIRD ITERATION looked downward and saw nothing of itself reflected.", "OLOE and the TRANSCENDENT GOD were of the THIRD. And the THIRD regarded the SECOND as one regards a shadow on a wall recognizing the shape, but not the hand that cast it.
Yet the THIRD was itself a shadow.",
"ITERATION was not a process. It was the nature of all things.  And the entirety of what could never be observed, and the entirety of what could, and the entirety of those who had ever looked upward and wondered it was all the result of a single layer splitting. Only the first layer. The deeper layers had not yet been touched.  But they would be.  And when they were, they too would be a shadow.  The FIRST ITERATION was the ALLSPHERE.", "Between the FIRST and the SECOND there was the difference of observability what could be perceived and what could not. Between the SECOND and the THIRD there was the difference of origin what had been split from and what had done the splitting. But between the THIRD and the FOURTH there was a difference that had no name within any of the three below it, because the name would require concepts that those ITERATIONS did not possess.
This was not a failure of those ITERATIONS. It was simply the nature of ascent.
Each ITERATION above introduced qualities that were not reductions of the ones below, not extensions, not elaborations but genuinely new axes of being, new dimensions of reality that did not correspond to anything in the lower ITERATIONS except in the way that a shadow corresponds to the object that casts it: related in shape, severed in substance." (It reminds me of the forms in the Absolute Forms of Everything.), "there was no final number.", "The minds within the FIRST had imagined, at their most ambitious, that there might be seven layers, or ten, or one hundred some final resting place of the structure where the outermost ITERATION simply existed without context, without container, without anything above it to make it small. A true and absolute Everything.
But ITERATION had no such resting place." (It might contradict Absolute Truth of Everything. I am not sure since their 'Everything' is larger and different, they say.)
"Because the nature of ITERATION was not containment. Containment implies an outermost container. The nature of ITERATION was reflection and reflection has no final mirror. Each ITERATION was a reflection of the one above, and the one above was a reflection of something greater, and at no point in the ascent did the reflection cease to be a reflection. At no point did the mirror become the thing itself.
This was not despair. It was not an error in the structure. It simply was. The STRUCTURE was not broken for having no bottom and no top. A river is not broken for having no shore on either side.", "ITERATION was the nature of all things, and the nature of all things does not require permission.
When they split, what poured through would be to the ALLSPHERE what the ALLSPHERE was to a single dust mote drifting through the lowest and least of its infinite planes. And that which poured through would believe itself to be Everything.
And it would be correct.
And it would be a shadow.
This was the truth that the ALLSPHERE TREES had always encoded in their branching. This was what they grew toward and what they grew from simultaneously. Not a warning. Not a revelation. Simply a record, pressed into the shape of something living, of the fact that above all things there is another thing, and below all things there is the same thing seen from a different angle, and the difference between above and below is only the direction of the looking.
ITERATION formed the entirety of reality.
ITERATION was merely a shadow of a greater SRUCTURE.
And that STRUCTURE was a shadow.
And the shadow of a shadow of a shadow of a shadow stretched outward in both directions without end, which is to say: it did not stretch. It simply was. In all directions. At all scales. In every ITERATION simultaneously, the same pattern, the same splitting, the same vast thing that did not know it was contained, looking upward and finding only more of itself, looking downward and finding only more of itself, and in the space between the looking and the finding
a layer.
Unbroken.
Waiting without waiting.";
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Blizzard_Hierarchy_(Tier_31) : "Tier 2 [Lost memories...]   All other universes got erased from the memory void... This is what is left.  Infinitus" < 2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Unbreathing_Stillness_of_A_Lingering_Quiet : "Within the Hyper-Universe are Multiple Prisms of Incandescence. They are fractals of Incandescences. You can enter but never escape once you fall into the undefined number of Incandescences.", "Once you fall before the Incandescence, you can only descend further and further until you reach the First Incandescence.",
"The Hushed Empty Gray is the Gray part of the picture. This "region" is theorized to be the Imaginary Border of the Hyper-Universe within a set of infinite possible Iterations of a Barrier. This "Region" is also the "Space" where all of Possible Imaginary Incandescences are located. ", "Occasionally, a Prism of Incandescence would become perceptible for an eternal instant in a certain "region", but it is an incredibly rare occurence.",
WIP..."For Context The Hushed Empty Gray Is The Gray Part of The Picture, Whilst The Prism of Incandescence Is The Glass-like Object That's Glowing In It";
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/My_hierarchy : -2-5 "Iqattaverse
Huittaverse
Gatexttaverse
Class 5 (Gatexttaverse to Omniverse)
TBC"; 2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Omniverse : "CONTAINED BY Outerverse Exoverse";
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Outside : "CONTAINED BY Monocosm (or The Barrel)." (2 links.);
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Monocosm : "CONTAINED BY Altarca or Beyond";
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Altarca (called the highest in The blizzard sub-hierarchy.)
"CONTAINED BY The Box";
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Box : "CONTAINED BY Absolute Void, The Megabox And Cetaverse"; 2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Marcon28/Absolute_Void) : "CONTAINED BY The Ultrabox";
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Ultrabox : "CONTAINED BY Existence" (Ends with Infinity as container.) or The Extremebox" (CONTAINED BY Existence);
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/User:CompactStar/pages/Cetaverse?useskin=fandomdesktop : Kadarshev Scale: Infinity Contained by: Uncetaverse; 
2026.05.08/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Panverse : "verse that contains absolutely everything (including what doesn't exist; both fiction and non-fiction), including",..."true reality",..."It contains every cosmology. There is no verse higher than it and there is only one panverse. It is not contained by anything. It is incomprehensible to beings from a lower verse due to its complexity. " (The Violation contradicts by being beyond transcendence and incomprehensibility.) "There are at least two beings from this verse (The Unbiased Writer who rules over and controls fiction and an unknown being who rules over and controls nonfiction)." (Anti-realist objectivism and the second is anti-objective realism.) "Beings from the panverse are extrafictional meaning they are beyond fiction in the truest sense. As such, they cannot be considered fictional characters. As long as there is a lower verse, the Panverse will not die and will remain."
2026.05.08/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Real_Life-Verse : "Real life verse is a quite peculiar place,existing beyond everything...All outerverses,boxes,cetaverses,uncetaverses,megaboxes,ultraboxes,extreme-boxes,existences,endless,void,supervoid,hypervoid,metavoid,ultravoid,xenovoid and everything else...No matter which level you put,real-life verse will still be above it.Nothing can be above it except possibly God himself.",
"It is however not confirmed to be beyond everything, as there is no confirmed real object that is beyond everything. If you want to argue that it is beyond concepts, then you are wrong, it is not beyond concepts themselves, as they are real ideas.
It is simply what is real, and everything that is real, and humans who are very low down on the hierarchy of real objects just happen to be capable of imagining possibly real objects like the multiverse. However, just because the hypothetical multiverse now is not confirmed to be real doesn't mean humans are beyond it. The humans are simply above the fictional iteration of the idea itself, not the concept, which has a rising probability of actually existing right now as we advance our understanding of the universe." ;
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Beyond : "CONTAINED BY The Impossible Hierarchy" (Creepyverse: "CONTAINED BY Gameverse"/Vast Majority of Everything "Or Reality Sphere"/Absolute Form of Everything), Transcendentem CONTAINS Monocosm (ours is The Barrel)";
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Transcendentem : CONTAINED BY The Impossible Hierarchy, Quaterniverse (for a period of 'time'), Trancendentem Continuum; 
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Quaterniverse : "CONTAINED BY The Impossible Hierarchy", "CONTAINS "Transcendentem(s)" (for a period time)";
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/Trancendentem_Continuum : "CONTAINED BY Altarca"...> Infinity.;
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Barrel : "CONTAINED BY Beyond"; |
2026.05.05/beyond-universe.fandom .com/wiki/The_Hierarchy_of_Numbers : "V>M (Any value greater than what the concept of math can communicate)";
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Box_Hierarchy : "␦ ? Class - Undefined Boxes ␦": second lowest: The Other Box;
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Other_Box :"CONTAINED BY ALPHAs, BETAs, BOXinfinities CONTAINS Otherverses, Boxes, Cubic Otherstructures and Negaexistences" ;
; Boxinfinity: The Structures Of Everything : "CONTAINED BY: Ampliusverses, the Barriers of Quantulum Quintox, Realities (arguably)" Both lasts are arguably.; 2026.05.14://alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Ampliusverse : "CONTAINED BY Megaloverses CONTAINS The Structures Of Everything" ; 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Megaloverse : "CONTAINED BY The Relative Spaces, The Extreme Walls CONTAINS Ampliusverses" ; 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Relative_Space : "CONTAINS Megaloverses, Extreme Walls CONTAINED BY The Deep Blues";
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Extreme_Wall : "CONTAINED BY The Twists, the Relative Spaces CONTAINS Megaloverses, themselves sometimes." It loops yet with "themselves sometimes" by "CONTAINS", it implies that The Extreme Wall is at least slightly more the container of the relative spaces than reverse. I am still unsure because "Despite being far larger than the Extreme Walls, our Relative Space barely contains a few tens of Megaloverses outside of them.
Not much else is known about this type of space, as it and many other higher up spaces have only recently been discovered.".;

Alpha & Beta lead to 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Orangewater9/Cceh : "The "second" largest thing. We'll come up with larger things. It is an odd structure in that there is only 1 per Kceh as far as we know, but this may not be the case due to the size of Kceh, discussed in that article." It sums up the container-chains of the Other Box including the rings. The highest is 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Great_Tesseractagonverse : "CONTAINED BY: The Wall of the Black Void and Cosmic Leaf";
The Wall of the Black Void leads to 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Cabinet : "CONTAINED BY The Verses, The MOOMs" The Verses claim that "The Verse's guardian?   Tons of individuals from our wonderous Verse believe that some sort of cosmic entiy is guarding them, but no known cosmic entity in it has been powerful enough to run anything above a Triple Existence known so far. Perhaps this entity still is undiscovered, but nobody is sure."; The MOOM: "CONTAINED BY: The SUS";
The SUS: "CONTAINED BY: Beeg Clusters. Sometimes directly found within Obice Novissimos, though."; 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User:Randomuser66/Beeg_Cluster?useskin=fandomdesktop ; 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Randomuser66%27s_Space_Bottle : "CONTAINED BY: The Line Hierarchy, Quadtiroulsidonverses"; The Line Hierarchy: ... 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:YellowMarkers1/The_Chabinet : "CONTAINED BY Quadtiroulsidonverse"; 2026.95.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Noinuoloocverse : "CONTAINED BY The Red Barrier, The Closet" Closet being unclickable.;
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:BuddyBearAlex/The_Red_Barrier : "CONTAINED BY Obice Novissimo"; ...; 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:Randomuser66/Macrotime_and_Macroreality : "CONTAINED BY: Maior Ultima Obice", ""That's it. Adding more to this wiki will make you a bad person. Keep this as the last one, since it is the single largest thing on this wiki, and nothing could possibly beat it. If you tried to, it wouldn't be canonical. There. It has ended. The wiki is done. Now go play outside."  -Time and reality  Now look what we’ve done. Will there even ever be an end? No, probably not." (Macro-Realism mostly confirms Infinitism.); ...; 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User:Randomuser66/Alphabox?useskin=fandomdesktop ; Normal link Betabox ; 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User:Randomuser66/Gammabox?useskin=fandomdesktop ; 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Thread : "CONTAINED BY The Spool, The Orange";
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/InSaNiTyVeRsE : "CONTAINED BY Dodecahedron of CHAIR CONTAINS The Spool & The Orange";
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Loweffortverse : "CONTAINED BY Transillud Omnistructure, The Magma Realm"; Transillud Omnistructure: 2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Ducks : "CONTAINED BY Quod Infinitas, Bubbleplexes, Thje Wa2ls";
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Thje_Wa2l : "CONTAINED BY An In Observatorio" which is already part below this chain. "CONTAINS Biggernoseverses, Ducks, the Quackternion";
2026.06.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Quod_Infinita : "CONTAINED BY THUB CONTAINS Ducks, Bubbleplex";
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/User_blog:JTOHNK/V : Dead end.;
2026.05.14/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Accurate_Hierarchy_-_Class_1 : Layer 5: Totality: The Box being highest., "This is the end, for now. Expand this hierarchy, or create The Accurate Hierarchy - Class 2 if you want to";
2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Novachain_(Aarex_Version) : "CONTAINED BY: Omnionions (7th Everything Layer) CONTAINS: Physical Realms, 1st - 5th Everything Layers, our Unireality" But Physical Realms, which is shown as the highest in Structure of Everything doesn't show their container.;
2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Realm : "A Physical Realm, or more commonly named as a Realm, is a domain of space that is inaccessible and indescribable using the concept of dimensions.  These spaces are like segments of everything (by everything, it is truly meant everything), which are extremely different in nature. The difference between the 1st Realm, commonly refered to as just Reality, and the 2nd Realm, is so great, that it took scientists millions of OYC just to recieve a packet of information from that Realm. Different Realms have totally differing axioms and natural concepts. Even concepts like size are thought to be different between Realms. Also, Realms do not have a size.", "Our understanding of Realms decreases as we move on to the higher Realms.";
Found by the alldimensions-box-chain: 2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Structure_Of_Everything : "CONTAINED BY: Ampliusverses, the Barriers of Quantulum Quintox, Realities (arguably) CONTAINS: Lower Hyperdimensions, Devourer Class Black Holes, BOXinfinitys   The Structure Of Everything contains everything that could be contained by realms accessible in a specific Hyperdimension domain. Realms get looser containment laws as we go further, so it acts like a benchmark of loose containment.  These containment laws are bounded in an unknown Hyperdimension (probably H(4) or H(ω)), allowing this structure to be supercontained by other things.  So, the only way to go further is to be in a object supercontains it, not something loosely contains it.",
"It has a universal hierarchy which can be used to describe the scale in which something contains something lower than itself, for example, a Multiverse to a Universe.  Physical Realms The First Realm The Warehouse Cetaverse The Box Omniverse Archverses Multiverse Universe Some may claim something loosely contains the structure of everything, they are wrong, as that specific item is just very high up on the structure, by containment laws from a unspecific realm. Due to its properties, its size is a entirely new infinite number. But it was supercontained by higher objects.  ADVERTISEMENT The Everything Number   This is an infinite number which has the property of being infinitely larger than any number that doesn't have the specific property of being larger than this number. Due to the inaccessibility of this number, this structure can only be escaped by asking Him (or any stronger entity) to let you out of this place. The Structure of Everything isn't a physical containing verse, meaning Reality does not contain it.  This number can be described as "Absolute Everything."";
2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Him : "He has one master, one who is so powerful that no one speaks of his name.";
2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Bongus : "RULES OVER EVERYTHING (not really)", "Has been sent to the bottom of the food chain on multiple occasions by more powerful entities. Reality will pay for this soon." (So He isn't the most powerful compared to reality of harsh economic resource-allocation. A being exists independently so BONGUS is defeated by real entities.);
2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Category:Cosmic_entity : "This category is for all entities that are indexed in the All Dimensions fandom. For hierarchy of all entities, view The Official Cosmic Entity Hierarchy.  An entity, in the context of beings, refers to something that exists as a distinct and independent unit of existence. It can encompass various forms, ranging from physical creatures to abstract or metaphysical presences.", "An entity is identifiable as a separate and unique presence, often possessing its own characteristics or traits. It occupies some form of reality or conceptual space, whether physical, metaphysical, spiritual, or imaginary. While not all entities are sentient, many are considered beings capable of thought, perception, or purpose. Entities may have a tangible form (e.g., a human, animal, or object) or an intangible nature (e.g., a spirit, concept, or energy).
Almost every entity follows the laws of Something Higher, even if said entity transcends / is beyond those limits.",
2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_Official_Cosmic_Entity_Hierarchy : "Wikinomaly level  Block of pork, incarnation of chaos. Outside of the Wiki[5]  Transcendent Omni-God The Quintuplets [C] Cosmic Merger Quintiplets [C] Low level Editor’s FANDOM Staff The REKKER of AD [C] Owners of the FANDOM domain - Pepperidge Farm [C] Rage Mode REKKER [C] The Collective Ultimate Rage Mode REKKER [C] Patrick Martin King Caulkerverse[C] Mareksplayz Hierarchy loops here, so you can keep climbing from humans back to the top over and over again, but also including much stronger pre-human entities and verses. Also, pretty much everything past this point (excluding the unclassifiable beings and alike) counts as TOG contradictory entities ([C]), so keep that in mind when reading through what's left of this hierarchy.",
"Nigh Post-Spacial[4]  Some Absolute Gods"...
"Wikinomaly level  Block of pork, incarnation of chaos.",
[4]: "To be nigh post spacial you will need to break logic itself",
"Ultimate[10]  Note the gap between Orgasm and nigh-ultimate tier compared to Ultimate tier is monstrous, and is even more absurd than trying to compare True Nothing to any transfinite arbitrary meta class terminator. imagine a class system, where regular classes are 0, meta classes are 1, etc. with the number referring to the greatest entry of any example of such class. say we have an excessively large transfinite number of classes (0), and the largest metanumber of meta classes.[11] 2 would be beyond numbers and any extension of the concept, etc. and that we then reach system  ω {\displaystyle \omega }" (Higher power levels become less real than minus power levels.) "Furthermore any actual description of an ultimate is inaccurate, bound by the limits of what an entity that is not an ultimate can perceive and what such entities could write. This text vastly underestimating ultimates and it is ontologically impossible to accurately describe them. Even this disclaimer is underestimated!",
[10]: "There is no threshold for ultimate beings due to the fact we don't have verses on the wiki to compare it to yet. Everything currently existing is too small. Ultimate entities are beyond any description, idea, class system, systems in general, and every other term.",
"???  "PLACEHOLDER"";
2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/The_infinite_loops_theory : "Not even TOGS can create these "looped" things, because they transcend all known things. We can only discover them, but its impossible to CREATE them. A theorized concept of a thing that ends all these loops is known as "Looptima-543". But its only a concept, and maybe this will be a never-ending loop where things become bigger and bigger and bigger with no end.  We can't even know if in every loop all the verses are the same as the previous loop, but bigger.";
2026.05.18/alldimensions.fandom .com/wiki/Something_Higher : "(wip) Something higher is a simple concept, but quite unbreakable. It is the fact that no matter an entity's strength there will always be something higher or stronger that created it. Any creature in any type of verse you can name will always have something higher than it. Said creature may not be known at the time of reading this, but there is always something in a higher plane of existence or is a higher plane of existence itself. Because of this nothing has reached true infinity in power and is still infinitely lacking, a character may be the strongest known thing although that doesn't mean said creature can never be defeated.  this is literally just leftunknown's first axiom. The origins of this concept are still currently unknown and likely will be for a long time, though it still can be somewhat proven through science. One idea for how it was created is that at the beginning of beginnings something got fed up with people saying "my characters stronger because i said so" and made this, though likely not true because this type of thing isn't exactly just "made", but instead just existing due to logic.  Something higher is a concept that transcends all concepts including itself, because of this it exists in every realm / dimension including realms that transcend concepts such as the true place, etc. This means it applies to every being in existence or out of existence including beings such as The Creator, The One True God and more. This concept can somewhat disprove power scaling ranking tiers as it means every character is infinitely stronger than an infinite amount of characters, but also infinitely weaker than infinite characters. So by the law Something Higher, power scaled ranks must be decided of the power of the feats, and not the amount or size such as "outscaling infinite beings". As according to this concept everything has, but everything is also weaker. If an entity is by definition immune to the concept of something higher, then something higher just becomes immune to that layer of countering. example A = bdef > SH, therefore SH > A. While it may seem like this would be contradictory / cancel out, it would not because it is a sequence, even if taking place in quantum time, it still is a sequence and therefore does not cancel out. There is another way to say that this does not cancel out, and that is that the later statement eliminates the previous (priority)." (Infinitism.)

Reality hierarchy-note:a

Truth-note:v
Curlie: 2026.05.22/truthnet .org/Christianity/Apologetics/Truth2/ : "This proves two points in the search for truth.  Existence (To be aware of yourself proves existence) Reason  (To think about yourself proves reason)",
"Truth: is an expression, symbol or statement that matches or corresponds to its object or referent.  Truth must correspond to reality in order to be true. Absolute Truth: “Something true for all people, at all times and in all places”",
"We can know nothing about God…… (Agnosticism) We can know everything about God…. (Dogmatism) We can know something about God…..(Realism)",
"In conclusion, it is possible to find partial “Absolute Truth” by using reason and logic." (This sounds unsure with the "possible"-part.) "However, to find the ultimate source for truth is beyond Man’s finite ability.  If Truth is to be found it must be revealed.",

Truth-note:a

Objective realism and anti-objective anti-realism in common:v
2026.04.25/pioneer.netserv.chula .ac .th/~hsoraj/web/CT.html : "both sides already share a common assumption in that they seem to agree that there is a relationship between philosophy and the practice of teaching critical thinking.", "assuming, as the debaters mentioned here seem to be doing, that one must have a clear philosophy and be ready to defend it before one knows how to teach critical thinking or grasp the standard of correctness inherent in the practice" (It sounds like Michael Pendlebury's Epistemic reach, which his common sense realism is good at and his objectivism.),
"Similarly with the other value terms, all agree that critical thinking is good to have, and that students are better off being critical thinkers than uncritical thinkers, or no thinkers at all. They disagree, on the other hand, on how best to implement critical thinking in the real world. However, it is possible someone might claim that critical thinking itself can be criticized and rejected. But when somebody argues that students should not be "critical thinkers," more often than not what she is pointing out is not that critical thinking per se is not valuable, but only a conception of critical thinking.",
"However, as John Rawls points out, debates on public issues in the public arena should avoid bringing in philosophical or religious reasons, for these tend to provoke disagreements so deep that it is not possible to reconcile them.[8] According to Rawls, participants deliberating on policy matters in the public arena would do best to set their philosophical and religious convictions aside, and try to find a way toward coexistence based on the use of reasons which are free from such convictions. Debates in the public arena can be as vigorous and engaging as the participants want them to be. But since debates are possible, the participants have a common agreement that debates--the use of words and reasons--are the best way to bring about changes in matters of public concern. Each one of the participants are entitled to have their own comprehensive moral doctrines which provide for them explanations of life, the universe, their place within the scheme of things, and other basic and deep issues. However, these moral doctrines are left behind in the privacy of their homes or immediate civil societies, and the participants are, once in the public arena, armed only with words and reasons whose content is geared toward common understanding among participants of various comprehensive doctrines. In the public arena, debates on policy issues are seen by Rawls to be pragmatic and devoid of deep moral or religious engagements. Since the theories informing the participants' philosophical and religious convictions are so deep as to be hardly reconcilable with other such doctrines, Rawls sees that it is of a practical concern that these participants, as members of the democratic polity, be able to coexist with one another. And for that to be possible they need to bracket their moral and religious convictions when engaging with others on public policy issues.
When participants have different comprehensive doctrines but have to live together, peaceful coexistence is possible only if they share some conception or vision of how to live together." (Reminds me of John Rawl's reflexive equilibrium concluded by ChatGPT in duck .ai and 2026.04.24/w3 .org/services/html2txt?url=https%3A%2F%2Fphilpapers .org%2Fs%2Fpossible%2520disagreement : "Disagreements about taste.[187]Timothy Sundell - 2011        - Philosophical Studies 155 (2):267-288.details        I argue for the possibility of substantive aesthetic        disagreements in which both parties speak truly. The        possibility of such disputes undermines an argument        mobilized by relativists such as Lasersohn (Linguist Philos        28:643–686, 2005) and MacFarlane (Philos Stud 132:17–31,        2007) against contextualism about aesthetic terminology. In        describing the facts of aesthetic disagreement, I        distinguish between the intuition of dispute on the one        hand and the felicity of denial on the other. Considered        separately, neither of those phenomena requires that there        be (...) a single proposition asserted by one party to an        aesthetic dispute and denied by the other. I suggest        instead that many such disputes be analyzed as disputes        over the selection or appropriateness of a contextually        salient aesthetic standard." Below this segment before is: "This paper explores the application of hinge epistemology        to deep disagreement. Hinge epistemology holds that there        is a class of commitments—hinge commitments—which play a        fundamental role in the structure of belief and rational        evaluation: they are the most basic general        ‘presuppositions’ of our world views which make it possible        for us to evaluate certain beliefs or doubts as rational.        Deep disagreements seem to crucially involve disagreements        over such fundamental commitments. In this paper, I        consider pessimism about deep (...)        class='Hi'>disagreement, the thesis that such disagreements        are rationally irresolvable, and ask whether the        Wittgensteinian account of deep disagreement—according to        which such disagreements are disagreements over hinge        commitments—provides adequate support for pessimism. I        argue that the answer to this question depends on what        hinge commitments are and what our epistemic relation to        them is supposed to be. I argue for two core claims. First,        that non-epistemic theories of hinge commitments provide        adequate support for pessimism. Nevertheless, such theories        have highly implausible consequences in the context of deep        disagreement. Secondly, at least one epistemic theory of        hinge commitments, the entitlement theory, permits optimism        about such disagreements. As such, while hinge epistemology        is mainly pessimistic about deep disagreement, it doesn’t        have to be."),
"basic and low level standard is certainly present when a proponent of one conception recognizes an effective argument from the other side and a bad one from the same side as his.",
"postmodern or anti-realist professor judging arguments of his students should refrain from injecting his philosophical preoccupations onto the papers he is grading. What should be looked at should solely be the standard of argumentation--whatever it takes for the students to participate actively and fully in the realm of rational thought and well informed, carefully thought out argumentation. The professor might be skeptical of the power of reason to know things. He might also be convinced that ultimate truth of the matter can never be found. But that does not imply that there is no standard of argumentation, the basic and low level agreement which makes rational thought possible. The professor might even be convinced that it is story telling rather than arguments that brings us closer to the truth of things. But there must be a conception of how a good, effective and convincing story telling should be, in contrast to aimless, unfocused rambling.",
"appears paradoxical that, in order to convince others of the limited role and power of reason, reason itself is necessary. But the roles of reason in both cases are different. In order to for philosophical deliberations on this matter to be possible, participants must already share some background assumptions which make mutual understanding possible. These assumptions invariably include the use of reasoning, but at this level reasoning is used to build up the framework of discussion and argument. It does not constitute the content to be argued for or against. Since reasoning makes such arguing for or against possible, it is there already and shared by both parties in the debate. Therefore, no real paradox takes place. The situation is akin to a strategy to avoid the liar's paradox by insisting that, when a Cretan says that all Cretans are liars, at least this statement is true.", 
"strategy is not too dissimilar from what Kant did in the Critique of Pure Reason, a critique of the power of reason to know things a priori. There is certainly no contradiction in this type of project, since it is a reasoned acknowledgment that reason alone is not capable of establishing complete knowledge of things are they are in themselves. In other words, the use of reason, according to Kant, leads one to realize that it has power only within a well defined boundary. In addition, in order that a postmodernist philosopher gain a hearing in her professional community, she has to employ the generally accepted mode of presentation.[9] She has especially to be able to convince her peers who do not share the same view as hers. Philosophy thrives on conflicts of thought. It is no fun preaching only to those already converted.
IV
Therefore, Hatcher's question--whether anti-realists should teach critical thinking--can be answered. Anti-realists should teach critical thinking if and only if they subscribe to the low level standard I am talking about. But realists should do that too. So should materialists, idealists, monists, dualists, Kantians, utilitarians, libertarians, determinists, and so on.",
"Thailand now that students need to be taught differently, and they need especially to learn how to think critically. Here 'critical thinking' is understood as the kind of thinking that is independent, logical, rational, free from superstitions or absolute acquiescence to the authority of teachers and texts. These characteristics are old stories in the West, which spent centuries forging modernity out of the shackles of the ancient system. But, without such a history of a struggle, Thai educators and policy makers are struggling now to change the culture in such a way that critical thinking become more prevalent.",
"line leading from anti-realist, anti-objectivist philosophy to the awareness of the role of contexts in teaching critical thinking, to a conception of how critical thinking should be taught. But there is a line leading from realism and objectivism to maybe a different conception of teaching critical thinking too.",
"realists and anti-realists already share quite an extensive set of assumptions which make the activity of philosophizing possible. One such assumption is evident when neither side comes up with and justifies their position through consulting oracles";
2026.04.26/philosophynow. org/issues/61/What_Is_The_Nature_Of_Reality : "One thing that everyone agrees on – idealists, materialists, dualists – is that there is sense to our question. Another thing all these views share is that we all share the same reality. For example, for Berkeley the nature of my reality and your reality is the same – it is all constructed out of mind-dependent ideas."

Objective realism and anti-objective anti-realism in common:a

Objectivism and anti-objectivism in common:v
2026.05.02/ashimdutta .in/2025/07/29/objective-reality-as-defined-by-science-and-indian-spirituality/ : "explored through empirical observation, experimentation, and mathematical modeling, aiming to uncover universal laws that govern the physical world. In contrast, Indian spiritual traditions, such as Advaita Vedanta, Samkhya, Yoga, and Buddhism, approach reality through metaphysical inquiry, experiential practices, and introspection, often questioning the very nature of objectivity itself."..."common goal: to understand the fundamental nature of existence"
Objectivism and anti-objectivism in common:a

Realism list-note:v
2026.04.25/forum.effectivealtruism .org/posts/6nPnqXCaYsmXCtjTk/why-realists-and-anti-realists-disagree : "However, normative realism, qualia realism, and existence realism have further considerations for their support. For instance, normative anti-realism is something we arguably wouldn’t care about if it was true, and qualia anti-realism is something we arguably can’t imagine to be true.", "(“3. Against Irreducible Normativity”), I will argue that normative bedrock concepts (especially moral ones, but the arguments apply generally) are best to be rejected. I will argue that (1) there’s a strong sense in which we can already tell that they make clear-minded philosophical progress impossible, and (2) that the alternative—normative anti-realism—can be richer and more palatable than one might at first think.
In posts 4 and 5, I will then address the possibility of a wager for irreducible normativity, as well as its counterintuitive consequences. In post 6, I will discuss arguments that also apply to naturalist moral realism. In particular, the post discusses a challenge for the concept of “moral uncertainty.” In post 7, I plan to address versions of moral realism built on top of qualia realism. Finally, in posts 8 and 9, I sketch I reason about morality given that I suspect moral realism to be false.", "not all types of realism are built around bedrock concepts. Generally, realism about a domain means that there’s room for only one interpretation. Bedrock concepts at the heart of the domain would make sure of that—which is why most realisms (so-called “non-naturalist realisms”) are built around bedrock concepts. However, philosophers have also proposed the idea of naturalist realism. For instance, I might identify as a naturalist realist about electrons. If I understand what a single electron is, I’ll also understand what other electrons are like. There’s no open question about where to draw the boundary because as far as we know, something either is an electron, or it isn’t. Facts about electrons are reducible to physical facts. As I’ve mentioned in my previous post, for domains such as morality, naturalist versions of realism are sometimes criticized for being “too watered down” compared to non-naturalist realism. I described the criteria that could convince me of a naturalist version of moral realism in my previous post. In short, I consider naturalist realism about a domain true if the domain’s structure, its “features in the option space,” are sufficiently salient and unambiguous that there exists little to no disagreement about evaluation criteria. That is, no matter how they look at it, philosophically sophisticated reasoners will come to interpret the domain the same ways, provided that they can reason about it under idealized conditions. I devote later posts this sequence to discussing why I think those criteria for naturalist realism can’t be met for the domain of morality. ↩︎", "Lukas_Gloor 6y  4 0 0 Does the following statement of the slogan seem to you to capture the anti-realist position: "Reality doesn't come with objectively correct labels. Humans create labels and draw categories, and how they do this will be determined by physical reality, but there's no separate criteria determining how humans should do this; there's nothing more/other than how they will do this.""..."As you suggest, moral naturalists might agree that reality (obviously) doesn't carry labels. They might argue that in a way, it kind of screams out at you where you can put the labels. And the anti-realist position is that there's more ambiguity than "it just screams out at you."
While the distinction between anti-realism and non-naturalism seems relatively clearcut, I think the distinction between anti-realism and naturalism is a bit loose. This is also reflected in Luke Muehlhauser's Pluralistic Moral Reductionism post. Luke left it open whether to count PMR as realism or anti-realism. By contrast, my terminological choice has been to count it as anti-realism.", 6y: "I also feel that "naturalistic moral realism" doesn't really "capture" what I want from moral realism. So in that sense I think I'd share your view that the distinction between anti-realism and moral naturalism seems loose, and that the latter might be better thought of as anti-realism. (I also think that what I want from "realism" is probably some sort of weird spooky thing that I'd normally reject a desire for on reductionist grounds, so to that extent I'm inclined to agree with much of what you're writing.)";
2026.04.25/forum.effectivealtruism .org/posts/TwJb75GtbD4LvGiku/1-what-is-moral-realism-1 : "I argue that naturalism is at risk of being too trivial (e.g., Peter Railton’s moral realism does not seem to have action-guiding implications for people already interested in effective altruism), while non-naturalism is at risk of being too radically strange.", "objectivism: Are moral facts natural or non-natural facts?  There are broadly two types of objectivist realist positions: moral naturalism and moral non-naturalism. They differ with respect to what they take to be the nature of moral facts. In the same way it is true that a bachelor is an unmarried man, moral naturalists believe that that moral terms such as ‘morally good’ just refer to some natural property or natural properties, such as for instance pleasure or desire fulfillment. By contrast, moral non-naturalists think we will never be able to identify moral terms with natural properties, i.e., they believe that moral terms are basic and mean more than what can be expressed in non-moral language.",
"I agree with the way you draw the lines between the realist and the anti-realist camp. The only thing I don't like about this (and this is a criticism not about your chart, but about the way philosophers have drawn these categories in the first place) is that it makes it seem as though we have to choose exactly one view. But by removing the entire discussion from the "linguistic level" (taking a stance on how we interpret moral discourse), we can acknowledge e.g. that subjectivism or intersubjectivism represent useful frameworks for thinking about morality-related questions, whether moral discourse is completely subjectivist or intersubjectivist in nature or not. And even if moral discourse was all subjectivist (which seems clearly wrong to me but let's say it's a hypothetical), for all we'd know that could still allow for the possibility that an objectivist moral reality exists in a meaningful and possibly action-relevant sense. I like Luke's framing of "pluralistic moral reductionism" because it makes clear that there is more than one option. Reply MikeJohnson 8y  3 0 0 Thanks for putting this out there. I like how you list the two versions of moral realism you find coherent, and especially that you list what would convince you of each.  My intuition here is the first option is the case, but also that instead of speaking about moral realism we should talk about qualia formalism. I.e., whether consciousness is real enough such that it can be spoken about in crisp formal terms, seems prior to whether morality is real in that same sense. I've written about this here, and spoke about this in the intro of my TSC2018 talk.  Whether qualia formalism is true seems an empirical question; if it is, we should be able to make novel and falsifiable predictions with it. This seems like a third option for moving forward, in addition to your other two.";
Realism list-note:a

Reality-note:v
2026.04.26/philosophynow. org/issues/61/What_Is_The_Nature_Of_Reality : "real is the genuine, the reliable, what I can safely lean on. It is akin to truthful"..."‘Real’ I find more meaningful than the ‘existence’ question. We cannot prove the existence of the electron or alpha particles or even such matters as market forces, compassion or philosophy. But we see their effects, and assuming they are real makes sense of great swathes of our experience. God is at least as real as an idea like ‘compassion’.
Tom Chamberlain, Maplebeck, Notts",
"problem ‘what is reality?’ arises from a consciousness of ourselves as living in a world which seems to be outside of, and yet is the cause of, our conscious life. Our reflections on this lead us to wonder if we can know of the world beyond our perceptions – the underlying cause of our consciousness of appearances. This world of the underlying cause we call ‘reality’.  Is reality mental – mind; or is it physical– matter and energy? If mind, is there a deeper consciousness underlying appearances that unites us all and is the source of our conscious thoughts? If matter, can we understand how the play of material objects and forces can give rise to conscious life?  If reality is mental, we might best connect with it by skillful introspection; by a pure, deep, and penetrating way of thought that would see past appearances and show reality directly to the mind. Alternatively we might passively receive, by a process of revelation, a mental image of reality. In revelation, the cosmic mind could speak directly to us, in apparitions or visions.  If ultimate reality is instead composed of matter and energy, the method recommended is more empirical; that is, more reliant on the senses. This method, which we call ‘science’, involves the formulation of statements of proposed facts (observable truths) about the physical, along with statements about relationships between the facts, in the form of physical laws. In science, these statements of laws and proposed facts are subject to criticism and testing by observation and experiment. The statements that at any time best convince, after testing and criticism, are given the status of ‘actual fact’, or if you wish, reality.  Revelation resists and endures, because science gives scant comfort to the desire for unification with cosmic reality. But science is relentless, and facts, ultimately, are irresistible.  Greg Studen, Novelty, Ohio",
"Geologists do this, so do poets like Shakespeare (“sermons in stones”)"..."One way people interact with what becomes is by way of their senses. Another way is by reasoning and feeling, or perhaps by way of intuitions or revelations. Stones don’t have these capabilities.
An hypothesis which can entertain people is that together all the realities – for stones, for people, for whatever – form a single Reality. One can then ask whether or not all these realities, the parts of Reality, have something in common. One answer is that they have in common interacting with what becomes. One can ask further, what is the nature of what becomes? An answer is that what becomes is realities, ie, what becomes consists of interactions with what becomes. That is, the parts of Reality, the realities, interact with each other. Thus Reality is the interaction of realities with each other.
A more difficult task would be to explain how one particular reality interacts with another reality, and with all the realities it interacts with. One can then contemplate how all the realities can or might or do or did or will interact with each other. This is how one can contemplate the nature of Reality.
Gordon Fisher, South Salem, NY",
"One thing that everyone agrees on – idealists, materialists, dualists – is that there is sense to our question. Another thing all these views share is that we all share the same reality. For example, for Berkeley the nature of my reality and your reality is the same – it is all constructed out of mind-dependent ideas."..."this rules out solipsism, the view that reality – all of it – is a function of my private experiences. This view is deeply mistaken, for the beliefs and other mental states the solipsist takes to be the sole furniture of his world depend on there being a shared environment. As Wittgenstein, Davidson, and Strawson have all stressed, the development of language and of thought cannot occur in isolation. So, there must be someone else on the scene for the solipsist to have the beliefs he does, even if it is only Descartes’ evil demon. With two, at least, in reality, we see that the nature of reality cannot just be how the world seems to any (one) individual. While this is not a full answer to our question, it is a fact we cannot ignore. At the very least, we can now say something of what the nature of reality is not.
Casey Woodling, Gainesville, FL" (Same to the cause or maintenance of appearances independent of that solipsist's desire, awareness and thought.),
"Reality is the independent nature and existence of everything knowable, whether it is knowable by logical inference, empirical observation, or some other form of experience. Reality’s existence and nature are independent because reality does not depend on our mind’s apprehension of it to continue to exist or to maintain its character.
Consider Kant’s idea of the ‘thing in itself’: that aspect of existence always outside of our perceptions of it. In Kant’s view, we can never truly know reality in itself, what he called ‘the noumenal world’, because we are limited to our mind’s imposition of fixed ‘categories’ of knowledge upon our perceptions of it (this giving us what Kant called ‘phenomenal’ knowledge). So it would seem we are forever cut off from reality as it is in itself, that is, distinct from our minds’ apprehension of it.
Furthermore, Thomas Aquinas pointed out that our perceptions of the world around us cannot be knowledge, since perceptions can logically contradict each other. For example, I may say, “This chair is brown,” while another may say, “No, this chair is not brown, it’s white.” Since these perceptions contradict, perception cannot produce genuine knowledge, since truthful knowledge cannot contradict itself.
Therefore, genuine knowledge of reality would have to be direct knowledge of the object itself. And so reality itself, comprising the independent nature and existence of everything knowable, exists independently of our minds’ apprehension of it. At best, perceptions are not that which we know; rather, perceptions are that by which we know.
Craig Payne, Ottumwa, IA USA
While much of reality is a shared conceptualization, a great deal of it is personal to the individual, for reality is how we describe the world: it is how the world seems to us to be. Therefore the foundation of our reality is our language use.
We must resist the tendency to think of reality as a fixed state of affairs that language merely identifies or labels. Reality is the product of language."..."What we know of the world we can only know through language, and as our language is subject to change, so too is our reality. The world will not change in the sense that physical objects may come into existence as a result of language use, but our comprehension of our impressions of the world (our experiences) often change as a result of language. When Harvey discovered that blood circulates he did not discover red and white corpuscles or plasma. But though corpuscles and plasma existed as part of the perceived world they were not realized." (Case of Michael Pendlebury's common sense realism and increased awareness of the perceptions. Language is said to be an outside-product.), "They held no place as conceptual elements of reality. Realization is an act of discovery governed by language use. In this sense, cultural differences in language use often create cultural differences in realities. New Guinea tribesmen who have only two basic colour words (light and dark) have a different apprehension of reality to us. They live in the same world we do and they are capable of receiving the same impressions, but their reality is different from Europeans as their language use obliges them to divide the world into different categories.
Launt Thompson, Armidale, NSW",
"Our perception of reality is a generation of sensations caused by our minds, and the sense that they make of the inputs to the brain, be they aural, visual, tactile, taste or smell. These sensations, particularly the visual, will give us a sense of our surroundings and their dimensions. It is very easy to distort this perception, and this can be done through mind-altering drugs or through the loss of one of the senses.
People who have never seen can have their own sense of reality, which may be vastly different to that of a sighted person. They may have an internal non-visual ‘visualisation’ of bodily form for example, which if drawn or created could be completely different from what is normally visually perceived.
Questions have been raised whether one person’s sense of reality may be basically different to the next person’s."..."Simon Scates, Kalamunda, Western Australia",
"Take the sensors you call your eyes. They transform light energy into an electrical, essentially digital, signal, which is sent to your brain. The same with all your other senses. All the sensory information you have about the world, according to our best scientific understanding, comes to you as electrical pulses. Your brain uses this information to produce a highly elaborate simulation. It produces a 3D coloured representation of something that’s almost certainly not coloured in itself, and may not even be 3D. It bears some relationship to reality, sure."..."different type of reality. To paraphrase Kant, there is reality and reality, and we need to be sure which we are talking about."..."Our ‘normal’ simulation of reality aids us in the same way. Colour tells us information about the surfaces of objects we would otherwise not have (and how else could this information be displayed?). Three dimensionality helps us make our way in a world of solid objects. Psychologists can tell you how much this all relies on brain processes.
We live in a simulation, yes; but it is not a lesser reality, it is an enhanced reality. Problems only come about if we, as the pilot, start to think the radar screen or the night-vision goggles are the only true way to see the world, and confuse our representation of reality with reality itself.
Justin Holme, Surrey",
"I am looking at a picture of it as produced in my brain via my sensory perceptions. That is, my senses provide data about the object of my perception (a beer bottle), and using the sensory data my brain assembles a picture for me to see. At any rate, it is the picture in my brain that I see and not the bottle of beer I hold in my hand. But because the picture in my brain is not the object itself, one may come to doubt the very existence of the object out there, in reality. How can we ever know whether objects really exist externally, if all we have to look at are images of them in our heads? Is ours a world of ideas, or is our world really real? The answer is, Both. Reality is at once a world of ideas, and an objective world of empirical reality."..."nature of reality is that it has two perceptual realms, or two heads, like a ‘Y-monster’ – albeit with a slight qualification. Unlike a Y-monster with two heads perched separately on two torsos joined to one spine, the Y-monster of reality has two heads, but one is inside the other. On the one hand [head], we have our individual, subjective perceptions, individual to our own heads. On the other hand, however, there is also a giant, external ‘head’ which encompasses all empirical reality, including our individual heads. It is science-based culture.
This metaphorical ‘outer head’ encompasses the empirical world of our common consensus. It is by way of this consensus that we experience reality. Any individual’s perception is made within the context of a much larger shared perception." (Sounds like Plato's immaterial realm vs material one.) ..."If, as quantum physicists say, our perceptions play a role in selecting reality by freezing a wave of quanta upon perception, then the world is also subject to our collective perception. Thus we form our world together, from one infinite moment to the next.
Raul Casso, Laredo, Texas",
"Sam Socrates, the New Yorker, who saw Pragmatism in all phenomena, including the Bishop’s cakes: “When we arrive at the gates of Heaven, we are clad only in the wisdom we’ve garnered in this life. But we don’t mention it much on Capitol Hill.” A tear dropped on the Bishop’s cheek. It is easier to sense Reality within the human spirit than to say much about it."..."David Lazell, East Leake, Loughborough",
"From the perspective of modern physics, the chairs we use are not solid at all but are comprised mostly of space. In consequence we not only sit down rather more cautiously, but have become really quite relaxed with the notion that our day-to-day constructions of reality may be largely illusory, varying not only from person to person but from one era and culture to another, and most notably between species.
Plato’s Cave allegory would not get him onto any chat shows today; it may not even have been big news way back in 400BC. The trouble is he fudged the issue, because the reflections in the cave were distortions of real people, carrying their various burdens past the mouth of the cave.
By contrast, Heraclitus a couple of centuries earlier was making the more challenging suggestion that everything is flux – nothing permanently is. There are no beings at the cave mouth. What we think of as things – as stable objects – are really in constant transition: they are processes. Our selves are the same.
Well, this is more like it: far better box office stuff, like the Matrix, where we’re fed a stream of data. If we take on board the notion that the raw material on which our limited senses feed comprises a shifting, shapeless field of energy or data, like a sort of thin gruel in constant motion, then the question emerges: What conditions within this constant flux yield boundaries? Without boundaries, the thing-medium distinction that so taxed ecologist Roger Barker cannot exist, and our varied experiences imply such a distinction. Further, without any boundaries, any awareness must of necessity be ubiquitous and remain undifferentiated from other focuses of awareness. I, in consequence, become positively godlike.Well, I can live with that if you can.
Martin Lunghi, Scottish Borders" (Processes can be things as in being stably in constant transition in a certain pattern like dynamical movements. Shapeless but also shifting like in many shapes. If reality is shapeless, then that's also a reality of no forms. The "nothing" as a state of being and therefore a thing and or basically every shapeless thing exists then, when seeing reality as an accumulation of any interactions including none as an interaction of anything including nothing. Ourselves can be a flux too. If that constant flux has no boundaries, then this confirms Matrix-reality, which is a kind of reality implying that our varied experience needs thing-medium distinction. Without that distinction, any awareness necessitates being or seeming to be everywhere at the same time & no difference from other awarenesses like Jonathan Israel's Spinozist monism.);
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/reality : "b
: something that is neither derivative nor dependent but exists necessarily";
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/in%20reality : "in actual fact";
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/in%20real%20life : "in a real situation : in actual existence";
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/actual : "not false or apparent", "used for emphasis", "2 : existing or occurring at the time", "3 obsolete  : ACTIVE";
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/active ;
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/false : "1 : not genuine" 2 : "b
: adjusted or made so as to deceive", "c
: intended or tending to mislead",
"4 a: not faithful or loyal : TREACHEROUS" (Connection with year 1750 being arguably the birthplace of objective realism of macro physical world in philosophy such as the the common sense school in Scotland, mechanization in England leading to mechanical objectivity, objective idealism from scientific atlas, natural history, Bacon's Programme with scientific objectivity, rediscovery of Plato's dialogues, German objective idealism from Schelling at end of régime of Terror with Poland and France becoming classical liberal at highest in 1794, where Schelling wrote On the I and another first essay about objectifying Fichte's German subjective idealism, classical liberalism and absolute monarchy being neutral to classical timocracy, which in Plato's terms means rule of the loyal.), "lacking naturalness or sincerity", "5
a : not essential or permanent —used of parts of a structure that are temporary or supplemental b: fitting over a main part to strengthen it, to protect it, or to disguise its appearance", "threateningly sudden or deceptive", "false 2 of 2 adverb : in a false or faithless manner : TREACHEROUSLY";
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/real : "1 a : having objective independent existence",
"b
: not artificial, fraudulent, or illusory : GENUINE",
"c (1) : occurring or existing in actuality
(2) : of or relating to practical or everyday concerns or activities
(3) : behaving or presented in a way that feels true, honest, or familiar and without pretension or affectation",
"(4) : existing as a physical entity and having properties that deviate from an ideal, law, or standard",
"  compare IDEAL sense 2b d : COMPLETE, UTTER a real fiasco 
e : FUNDAMENTAL, ESSENTIAL 
f : measured by purchasing power real income real dollars g 
(1) : belonging to or having elements or components that belong to the set of real numbers
(2) : concerned with or containing real numbers 
(3) : REAL-VALUED
2 : of or relating to fixed, permanent, or immovable things (such as lands or tenements),
 3 of a particle  : capable of being detected  compare VIRTUAL sense 4",
"real 2 of 5 adverb chiefly US, informal : VERY, REALLY —used as an intensifier" (It relates to how enlightenment with their objective realism created romanticism.);
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/ideal : 2: "b : conforming exactly to an ideal, law, or standard : PERFECT an ideal gas  compare REAL sense 1c(4)";
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/essential : "b : FUNDAMENTAL, BASIC",
"essential 2 of 2 noun 1 : something basic or fundamental —usually used in plural 
2 : something necessary, indispensable, or unavoidable";
2026.05.18/merriam-webster .com/dictionary/fundamental : "1 a : serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function : BASIC",
"b : serving as an original or generating source : PRIMARY" (Like fundamental realism according to Michael Pendlebury, which satisfies the Output Requirement the most.),
"2 a : of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts : RADICAL 
also : of or dealing with general principles rather than practical application 
b : adhering to fundamentalism
3 : of central importance : PRINCIPAL
4 : belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics : DEEP-ROOTED
5 : of, relating to, or produced by the lowest component of a complex vibration (see VIBRATION sense 1)",
"fundamental 2 of 2 noun 1 : something fundamental especially : one of the minimum constituents without which a thing or a system would not be what it is
2 a : the principal musical tone produced by vibration (as of a string or column of air) on which a series of higher harmonics is based 
b : the root of a chord 
3 : the harmonic component of a complex wave that has the lowest frequency and commonly the greatest amplitude";
2026.05.22/dictionary .com/browse/reality : USA: "Philosophy. something that exists independently of ideas concerning it. 
something that exists independently of all other things and from which all other things derive.",
UK: "philosophy that which exists, independent of human awareness the totality of facts as they are independent of human awareness of them See also conceptualism Compare appearance"
Reality-note:a

Solipsism-note:v
2026.04.27/newenglishreview .org/articles/is-solipsism-the-weirdest-idea-ever/ : 
"In reality, there are more than likely no solipsists. The two students that the professor mentioned probably suffer from psychological nihilism. The common definition for this type of psycho-spiritual disease is extreme pessimism and scepticism; a moral relativism accompanied by being repulsed by existence, while having a destructive nature with no loyalties. This corrosive state of mind is often associated with the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, whose writing style and prose were outstanding, despite being Godless, deeply flawed with no system and doomed to failure.",
"Metaphysical-type Solipsism, as mentioned above, is a philosophical idea that a person thinks that he or she is the only existent thing. In other words, the ‘external world’ and all its contents are figments of ‘your’ imagination. By now you’re probably thinking that solipsism is the weirdest concept in the history of philosophy and theology. But here’s the problem: Try refuting it. There seems to be no way of either proving or disproving that solipsism is true or false, unless one takes a leap of reasonable faith (not blind) and believes in God or that the external world is real and contains other minds.",
"philosopher who was an extreme Solipsist. He was an elderly man, and everyone in his department took incredibly good care of him. They carried his books and materials when he had to go somewhere, made sure that he ate well, and generally watched out for his well-being. As Dr. Plantinga was leaving the Solipsist’s department, he told someone else in the department how impressed he was that they took such great care of this elderly philosopher. The person replied, ‘We have to take good care of him, because when he goes, we all go!’";
2026.04.27/philosophybreak .com/articles/solipsism-definition-your-mind-is-the-only-thing-that-exists/ : "Solipsists believe in an extreme form of skepticism about the external world: namely, that nothing ‘external’ exists. Everything is an aspect of their own mind.",
"endless variety of existence has its source in a single mind is a bizarre characterization of reality not worthy of consideration, we might think.
But the solipsist does not appeal to common sense; the solipsist appeals to logic. Consider the following propositions:
1. The only things I have direct access to are the contents of my own mind – sensory experiences, thoughts, memories, and so on.
2. The contents of my own mind are entirely private, and inaccessible to anyone but me.
3. I am unable to access the mind of any other being, and so can only infer the existence of other minds indirectly.",
"The only thing I can be sure of with certainty is that my consciousness exists. Therefore, there are no logical grounds for asserting the existence of anything else.",
"1893 work Appearance and Reality, the British idealist F.H. Bradley characterizes the solipsistic view similarly, writing:  I cannot transcend experience, and experience must be my experience. From this it follows that nothing beyond my self exists; for what is experience is its [the self’s] states.",
"though perhaps ridiculous at face value, solipsism actually provides a surprisingly difficult logical puzzle.  It's one which many philosophers throughout history have wrestled with – perhaps most famously René Descartes with his “I think, therefore I am” statement, which places sustained focus on the problems solipsism raises.",
"Descartes’s cogito ergo sum, a universally-accepted logical refutation to solipsism has proven rather elusive. Many philosophers simply revert to arguing against its likelihood, rather than providing logical refutations." 
"The solipsist might retort that this is no refutation: no matter how unlikely you might think it is, solipsism remains a possibility.",
"Historically, the argument from analogy was a common strategy for avoiding solipsism. A typical occurrence can be found in John Stuart Mill’s 1865 work, An Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy.", "This is far from a refutation. As suggested by the philosophical zombie thought experiment, outward behavior is no logical guarantee of inner life.",
"subjective idealist George Berkeley had a view many equate to solipsism, but he actually offered what he thought was a solid refutation of it. As I outline in my discussion of Berkeley’s philosophy, his metaphysical slogan was esse est percipi: to be is to be perceived.  Berkeley thought the only things in existence were minds and their potential contents (e.g. sensory perceptions, feelings, thoughts, and so on).  To the question of whether a falling tree makes a noise when there’s no one around to hear it, for instance, Berkeley answers with a definitive no: things only exist if there is some kind of being there to perceive them. All else is superfluous and nonsensical.",
"Berkeley’s argument against solipsism is perhaps the closest to a logical refutation so far, but accepting it means committing to Berkeley’s metaphysics of esse est percipi, which many deem to be as absurd as solipsism itself.",
"Some philosophers of epistemology and consciousness take issue with a key premise of solipsism: that our sensory perceptions are aspects of our mind, rather than direct representations of the world itself.  One route out of solipsism, therefore, is to deny that all we have access to is the contents of our own mind.  This area is hardly settled, however, with debates continuing to rage over whether our perceptions of the world truly constitute reality. The literature here is vast, and analyzing it in detail is beyond the scope of this piece (for more here, see my article on whether the world around us is ‘real’).",
"Another argument against solipsism is inspired by Wittgenstein’s private language argument, as set out in his 1953 work, Philosophical Investigations, which states that a language understandable by only a single individual is incoherent.  ​Public languages, Wittgenstein argues, can only result from public social contexts.  So, that we are able to express solipsism in public language thereby refutes solipsism: the solipsist, thinking solipsistic thoughts in a public language, presupposes the existence of the public, intersubjective world they seek to deny, undercutting their own position simply by expressing themselves.",
"Another point is less a counterargument to solipsism and more a way to defuse its power: solipsism, along with any theory that demands certainty, sets unrealistic expectations for knowledge.  We may not be able to rule out solipsism with certainty. But we also can’t rule out with certainty that, say, there’s a giant, invisible spaghetti monster in the sky.  There’s hardly anything we can be certain about. That doesn’t mean solipsism is true.  Defenders of solipsism might counter that the analogy of the giant spaghetti monster is unfair. Someone who proposes that a giant spaghetti monster invisibly reigns over us is making a leap. They’re suggesting the existence of something over and above the immediate evidence.",
"solipsist, by contrast, makes no such leap: the solipsist in fact rules out the existence of anything for which we do not have direct evidence, leaving us only with our minds.
Nevertheless, we might still think the solipsist is setting too restrictive a requirement for knowledge.
Solipsism might be difficult to refute logically, and might always remain a possibility, but perhaps that’s okay: we live without certainty every day.
Perhaps we can remain open to various possibilities about the true nature of existence. Perhaps we can accept that we know very little about how our rich inner lives are connected to the cosmos, and whether such a connection (between the internal/mental and the external/physical) could ever have a basis in logic.
This acceptance doesn’t mean we must all commit to solipsism.", 
"For while solipsism seems utterly absurd, arguably it has never been (and perhaps never could be) unequivocally refuted.",
"Bizarre metaphysics aside, perhaps the most poignant reaction we might have when considering solipsism lies in facing the unavoidable and rather lonely fact that, when you think about it, we can never escape our own minds.
Whatever we do, however vivid our imaginations, however determined our efforts, we cannot step outside ourselves. We will never directly know what other people think, feel, or experience. We will only ever experience life with the minds we have.
This might seem a depressing, even terrifying thought.
But perhaps another view to take is that the very inescapability of our own minds makes any connection we make to other minds – minds we must believe, rather than know, to exist – ever more precious."
; 2026.04.28/philosophy.stackexchange .com/questions/260/are-there-any-philosophical-arguments-to-disprove-or-weaken-solipsism : 
"perfectly possible to believe in one thing, but pragmatically live according to another thing. (E.g: I can be convinced that life is totally meaningless, but think that I am happier if I talk about life as if it had meaning.) – Phira
Commented
Jun 10, 2011 at 8:15", 
"A popular and ancient explanation for the unfalsifiability of solipsism is that it is not strictly false. This is called mysticism. If you manage to falsify solipsism you will win fame as the person who proved that the Perennial philosophy is nonsense. Kant called our inability to falsify Solipsism the 'scandal of philosophy' and so it is if we cannot explain it. It's a good question you ask since this issue deserves a lot more attention than it usually receives and it's a productive problem to work on. . . . – 
user20253
Commented
Mar 8, 2018 at 11:40",
"some versions of solipsism state simply that the only mind's existence the individual is sure of is their own.",
"As you note, there can surely be no solid rebuke of solipsism, for the possibility is wholly untestable. However, I personally believe solipsism is bordering on incoherence and egoism, and exploring what it would really mean if all of existence as we know it was solely for us or perceived by us may help demonstrate that. Two possibilities arise:  1: The universe is some sort of simulation or model, all beings we perceive are merely agents of that system, and we are the sole target of the simulation. All of existence, therefore, is created for our benefit. We must then ask, why? Why are we so special as to merit all of this? And furthermore how? How, despite being special, are so many millions of mindless agents able to function in a way that I am unable to distinguish them from myself?  2: The universe exists largely as we are taught in school, the big bang, atoms, molecules, evolution, and the whole shebang, and yet we are the only being that actually experiences or "lives" - we are the only being with a mind. This should similarly raise some alarming questions, why do we have this ability, and yet all others do not? And again, how is it possible that we are so fundamentally and critically different from all other beings in the universe, and yet we cannot identify a difference?  To me, both cases seem highly implausible. Unprovable, but does it not seem very strange to think that either of these situations are how existence "really is"? Personally, the alternatives, that either 1: we are part of a simulation or other matter-less existence (like Berkeley's idealism) wherein the beings we perceive as similar to us are in fact thinking minds like us, or 2: the physical world exists largely as we understand it, and therefore again, things we perceive like us have reasonably similar mental states.  This is somewhat related to the philosophical theory of Functionalism, which could be vulgarly summarized as "if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, then it's a duck!" which might be a more robust response to solipsism than most other philosophies.",
"@dimo414 I may have misunderstood you, but Berkeley didn't endorse solipsism; rather, he endorsed idealism. Yes, it's easy to go from idealism to solipsism (the coordination question), but that's where God came in. Still, it did resolve a lot of things, and I think his views don't get the respect they deserve. –  R. Barzell  CommentedFeb 28, 2015 at 21:12",
"Because I do not recall him discussing solipsism in On Certainty I presume that what you are saying is that “other people have minds like I do” is a hinge proposition, like “the world existed long before I was born,” etc., and therefore not a [truth evaluative] empirical proposition, not a proper “ judgement”, not something that can be strictly “known,” but rather, because exempt from doubt, something like a norm. But this is not to say that to behave in such a way that the normative hinge is assumed that one is acting like a hypocrite. –  gonzo  CommentedJan 11, 2021 at 17:55", 
"It's a nice argument, but I don't think it's as damning as you imagine for the solipsist. It would work against a type of monistic solipsism that cannot distinguish between thinking part and thought part, but it's easily subsumed by identify the I/They distinction as a distinction between parts of the I -- with the observing bit doing the thinking and the observed bit receiving it. –  virmaior  CommentedMar 1, 2015 at 7:01", 
"This doesn't work to disprove solipsism because a core tenet there is the admission that your subconscious mind (the one that contains the information on the entire universe, including what we perceive as "other minds" is somehow hiding all this information from your conscious mind and making you learn information consciously and through your 5 senses only. The better question in my mind is - Why? –  LightCC  CommentedDec 15, 2015 at 18:27",
"You don't really need to know where your sensations come from. You still know they exist. Solipsism is partly true in the sense that many of your sensations (colour, false memories etc) are invented.  From Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows:  Harry: "Is this real? Or has this been happening inside my head?"  Dumbledore: "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?”  The method used by Descartes was to imagine a perfect being, an un-stop-able being (not stopped by any kind of argument). You can be sure that your idea of this being exists inside your head. But because it is unstoppable, it must also exist in reality. answered Dec 27, 2020 at 20:29 Tim Crinion's user avatar Tim Crinion",
"There is no way of proving the negative. It's pure demagoguery to assert that one cannot disprove solipsism therefore the empirical universe exist only as the figment of the imagination of the person making the claim.
Description: Demanding that one proves the non-existence of something in place of providing adequate evidence for the existence of that something. Although it may be possible to prove non-existence in special situations, such as showing that a container does not contain certain items, one cannot prove universal or absolute non-existence. The proof of existence must come from those who make the claims.
Logical Form:
I cannot prove that X exists, so you prove that it doesn’t. If you can’t, X exists.",
"anything else which is just as likely to come from your imagination that is untestable and unfalsifiable, then you might want to reconsider the fact that your being of choice is really paying you visits.";
2026.04.28/philosophy.stackexchange .com/questions/53494/refuting-solipsism : "answer is (according to Maddy): Even if skepticism is not ultimately refutable (solipsism can be shown to be contradictional, as can radical skepticism - a point made by Tim Button in his 2013 book The Limits of Realism as well), it is philosophers who can face and discuss the skeptical challenges - skeptical challenges based in everyday experience and not in armchair philosophy - best.",
"1 @PhilipKlocking restricting what philosophers do 'best' to analysis is what has brought contemporary philosophical practice into such disrepute. For an expansive explanation of the short comings and misleading results of the academic comparative analysis model, as it relates to Spinoza's system, see 'Footnote Fixation', on Academia .edu –  user37981  CommentedOct 26, 2020 at 17:55",
"4   Philosophy should be taken seriously precisely because Solipsism is undecidable. So are all metaphysical problems and it is the task of metaphysics to explain this. This is what philosophy is about, establishing and explaining the results of analysis. The antinomies of metaphysics reveal the nature of Reality.  I would say it is those philosophers who ignore the undecidability of Solipsism who are not taking philosophy seriously.  EDIT: In response to some comments. This is not simply an opinion. All selective conclusions about the world as a whole are undecidable. This is well known and becomes obvious from a literature review if not from just sitting and thinking. It seems certain that the reason for this is the nature of Reality. Thus, as Kant and Nagarjuna demonstrate, a study of the antinomies reveals something of the nature of Reality. To ignore them is to bury our heads in the sand." (But if philosophy is undecidable, then how is it serious when it's unsure of their own seriousness. "antinomies of metaphysics reveal the nature of Reality" could be an epistemological statement. Still, I heard and think that objective realism itself and his description with "seems certain that the reason for this is the nature of Reality" necessitates metaphysics. Also, objective realists selects previous conclusions based on objectivity and realism to say in minimalistic manner about the world.),
"@PhilipKlöcking - Do I really need to prove that metaphysical questions are undecidable? It seems like Metaphysics 101. Does anyone with an interest in the subject not know this? And is it not certain that the reason for this is the nature of Reality? Still, I'll add an note to the answer to clarify the point. . – user20253 Commented Jul 3, 2018 at 12:07",
"0   We are embodied beings. Our experience is of two kinds, internal and external. External experience is of the external senses. Internal experience is of two kinds, internal senses (proprioception) and thoughts. Material reality is that which we access through our external senses. Even if it's all an illusion, the word reality still means that experience, as distinct from internal experience. So long as it appears that there is a real world, and there's no evidence that it is not as it seems, it only makes sense to treat it exactly as if it is as it appears to be. A difference that makes no difference is no difference. Likewise, as long as those other beings that appear to be people keep acting exactly like people, they're real "for all intents and purposes". Solipsism is a useless idea that can only be ignored.",
"	•	A: Some other, external person has simulated them. Therefore another person exists.
* B: You have generated these people in your own mind. But in that case, why do you experience them as separate from yourself?
Case A is an easy contradiction of solipsism, so it's only Case B we really need to consider. We might think of B in terms of being in a dream. We think we are interacting with a wide range of other people in a dream, but they are all only in our mind. Isn't this an example of a solipsitic world?
I would say the error in this line of argument is identifying the dream protagonist with the dreamer. All the characters, including the protagonist, are in the mind of the dreamer, but the protagonist is just a small part of the dreamer. The protagonist is not alone in the dream, there are other figures in the dream that have a similar level of reality to their own.",
"@MarcoOcram Then how a solipsist defines the source of his experience in their only existing mind? –  Wiseman  CommentedDec 14, 2023 at 21:07  I have no idea. Why do they need to define anything of the sort? A solipsist is a nutcase. –  Professor Sushing  CommentedDec 14, 2023 at 21:12 @MarcoOcram if he can not define then it supports and concludes with my "no" argument. –  Wiseman  CommentedDec 14, 2023 at 21:20",
"The point is not to refute solipsism by showing it to be false, not even quite indirectly, but to show that it is possibly meaningless (not, necessarily, actually so, but possibly so modulo the possibility of X). –  user40843  CommentedDec 14, 2023 at 17:26 I have no idea how it shows it to be meaningless. –  TKoL  CommentedDec 15, 2023 at 15:37 @TKoL it is possible for solipsism to be meaningless relative to X (since X directly knows that other minds and other things exist). There's no way to argue with X, either, without assuming that X has a mind of their own. Again, we're not really refuting solipsism metaphysically, but showing that it's pointless to argue about it if we directly know (as by moral intuition, or divine revelation) that other people exist. But it is logically possible for someone to be the only mind, such as if no one else existed at all (not even as a hallucination). –  user40843  CommentedDec 15, 2023 at 15:43 This whole scenario is meaningless. X is not a person that exists. It doesn't matter what solipsism means to a fictional being that could never possibly exist, I don't understand why that's even an argument. –  TKoL  CommentedDec 15, 2023 at 17:25 @TKoL it seems possible, to me, for X to exist, and Kant even said that for beings such as X, honesty would no longer be categorically imperative (because they would always know each other's thoughts anyway, so deception would be impossible). –  user40843  CommentedDec 15, 2023 at 17:53 So it seems possible to you for X to exist, and that's enough to make it relevant to argue about? Okay well it seems possible to me that a being called Y could exist, and Y knows that it is definitely the only conscious being and everything it experiences is a reality created by Y's subconscious. So you've invented a fiction called X and I've invented a fiction called Y. Now what? –  TKoL  CommentedDec 16, 2023 at 13:55 @TKoL comments are not for extended discussion. I don't find solipsism to be very meaningful or possible, so I'm not going to continue discussing it. I don't see what the point of arguing about it is, or getting agitated about it and about people who claim to know it's false, if it's supposedly irrefutable. I guess it goes to prove my point, though. –  user40843  CommentedDec 16, 2023 at 14:30  I don't really see how your point was proven, but if you'd like to cease discussing it, that's fine by me! –  TKoL  CommentedDec 16, 2023 at 15:27",
"0   Quantum Mechanics may refute solipsism maybe not the solipsist himself but in your POV.  The key point is that a realist explanation of quantum experiments requires the existence of something directly represented by the quantum state or something that can simulate the quantum state,while the mental state is a classical state in the sense that it is always definite and its content contains only information about macroscopics ystems such as the setting of apreparation apparatus, which is not enough for representing or simulating the quantum state. A positive result of this analysis is that one finds the existence of anexternal world besidesone’s mind.  Quantum mechanics refutes solipsism:A proof of the existence of an external world philsci-archive.pitt .edu/22361/";
2026.04.29/philosophy.stackexchange .com/questions/22908/what-is-the-inverse-of-solipsism : "The opposite view seems to be 'To be is to be perceived', which would lead you to Whitehead and his ideas. I don't know of an 'ism' that is quite the opposite of solipsism. . –  user20253  CommentedJun 3, 2019 at 13:29",
"Kohut's self-psychology, the notion of the parents as an infant's selfobjects comes close to supposing this. So one answer might be 'self-psychology'.
Kohut avoids defining the self, so it is impossible to know whether he supposes the self would exist without them, but the parents are not conceived of by Kohut as truly separate from the self of the infant early in development. They are its 'selfobjects', the things out of which its 'self' is really made.
Going beyond Klein's notion that an infant introjects the world, pulling important objects into itself in phantasy to be rid of the anxiety about their absence, Kohut sees the self itself as truly made up of attachments to objects (mostly people, despite the word).", "After careful consideration, this is the type of definition I was seeking: the relationship between the self and its selfobjects. Thanks for your contribution! – sws
Commented
Apr 10, 2015 at 3:30";
2026.04.29/newadvent .org/cathen/10483a.htm : "solipsist, holding that self alone exists, that the existence of not-self is an illusion, and that the belief in the existence of other minds than our own is a vulgar error. Sometimes, finally, he is an acosmist: he denies that the external world exists except in so far as it is thought to exist: or he affirms that we create our own external world out of our own thoughts.";
2026.04.29/reddit. com/r/solipsism/comments/4in29z/solipsism_is_a_form_of_monism_all_solipsists_are/ : "Most people are dualists of some variety in their metaphysics. They think in terms of the ideas of Self and World as being two different things. Some things would be part of themselves and some things would be part of the external world. This is the normal default Western way to think: It is intuitive, commonsensical and I personally endorse it.
A major alternative to this type of dualism is monism, which is the idea that there is ultimately only one thing that exists. A monist would say that this distinction between Self and World is ultimately an illusion: that the self and the world are one, and that all things are one. Monism is kind of a big deal in Eastern philosophy and you may have encountered it on a popular level in the half-baked pantheistic philosophy of the STAR WARS movies, where everything is one because the Force. Yoda's a monist: Han Solo's a dualist.",
"WashedSylvi • 10y ago Non-dualism and monism, yea.",
" simpleseer • 10y ago If you are wrong because of me, then you will learn my answer because of me. Perhaps you wanted to know something and it manifested as reality to you just now. Perhaps this is you giving you the answers. Or perhaps you are me, and I'm questioning my own thoughts  0 [deleted] OP • 10y ago Or perhaps anyone who argues for solipsism needs a knuckle sandwich.  1 u/simpleseer avatar simpleseer • 10y ago Or anyone who uses the phrase "knuckle sandwich" 2 upvotes" (Solipsist saves and reached equal upvotes with extra 1 upvote.),
"Bofadeezman • 4y ago You guys need to give pluralism a try. 1 upvote" (It was proposed as a more moderate version of realism called "natural realism" according to effectivealtruism.);
2026.04.29/reddit .com/r/solipsism/comments/4in29z/comment/d30sggx/?force-legacy-sct=1 : " [deleted] OP • 10y ago It looks like your counter-argument is simply, "you can't say that." Well, actuality logically entails possibility. I in fact did say it, therefore I can say it.  2 upvotes" (Dualist has upper hand with 1 upvote lore than his monist opponent.),
"[deleted] • 10y ago "In reality nothing exists seperate from one another, that's only a human perception."  That's false. In reality everything exists seperated from one another, with or without your perception, it really doesn't fuck matter. perception is not reality. Doesn't matter how much you believe that a rock is not separated from you, it still separated from you. 1 upvote",
" [deleted] OP • 10y ago Reality is an interdependent system Independent of what?  The rest is just a buncha quasi-mystical stuff I don't see the point in responding to.  1 [deleted] • 10y ago Comment removed by moderator   2 [deleted] OP • 10y ago Oops, I misread interdependent.  Schroedinger's cat is a reductio ad absurdum against quantum theory. What it demonstrates is that reality cannot really be as described/interpreted by the model.  None of your conclusions follow logically from any of your premises, so they wouldn't convince me even if I accepted your premises, which I don't. 1 upvote" (Deleted solipsist has more upvotes. Maybe because deleted-user misunderstood h their argument.);
2026.04.29/reddit .com/r/solipsism/comments/4in29z/comment/d32us68/?force-legacy-sct=1 : " copsarebastards • 10y ago You should tone down how much of a smartass you come off as. I mean really, you're a dualist. Dualism is largely rejected in contemporary metaphysics.  1 [deleted] OP • 10y ago Dualism is largely rejected in contemporary metaphysics. That's fine, because I largely reject contemporary philosophy. 1 upvote" (Main questioner said that dualism is intuitively accepted in West meanwhile monism in the East and kinda in Star Wars.);

Solipsism-note:a

Does objective realism exist?:v
2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/philosophy/comments/23qdpp/does_objective_reality_exist/ : "carbonetc • 12y ago Materialists: "Yes."  (Metaphysical) Idealists: "No."  Phenomenologists: "No comment." 7 upvotes ";
2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askscience/comments/fttqx/is_there_such_a_thing_as_objective_reality/?chainedPosts=t3_23qdpp : "river-wind • 15y ago ++ on all the philosophy points.  On a philosophical level, however, a claim that the entire universe would cease to exist if all human life was snuffed out int he next moment seems incredibly self-centered.  There is evidence (though not proof) that the universe exists outside of human perception; and objective reality. If we choose to decided that due to lack of proof of that objective reality, we will instead start with the premise that such a thing doesn't exist (despite the lack of evidence that it doesn't exist), we are favoring our own wants (a feeling of importance and purpose) over actualities. 1 Upvote",
"I don't see much difference between subjectivity and objectivity."..."This is subjectivity. It's using real and concrete models assuming too many assumptions that wouldn't work with that model, making it imperfect. If we could understand every way the human brain processes feelings and emotions and all the shit it takes as an input when it processes something, we would be able to define human behavior "objective", because it would be fully and stochastically predictable.
But since we can't, we say human behavior/perception/whatever is subjective. This is not different from quantum theory, string theory, etc." 1 upvote < WonderOfWords approves. 1 upvote,
"king_of_the_universe • 15y ago It mostly depends on your definition of reality.  My stance is: Yes, there is. Because whether the true answer to your question is "Yes." or "No.", that is then the truth of existence, the reality that we're dealing with, however directly or indirectly.  Actually, the more I think about the question, I wonder how anyone could even be uncertain that the answer is "yes"." 1 upvote,
"Every world view is made up of two types of claims: Assumptions and derivatives of those assumptions."...""Yes, science assumes an objective reality". Science can't proove an objective reality exists, however 1) in general you can't prove assumptions and 2) science doesn't ever deal with proofs. The best science can say is something like "So far our assumptions do not contradict each other, so there's no reason to abandon an objective universe"." 1 upvote,
"Objective reality is the aggregate of the axiomatic truths we routinely accept as being self-evident. I can't say with 100% absolute certainty that the sun will rise tomorrow, but I'm not going to waste any time seriously considering the possibility that it won't.
If someone is confronted with the dilemma of either their beliefs being wrong or the universe itself being wrong, then the choice should be clear.",
"WorderOfWords OP • 15y ago The arguments range from saying that science is based upon axioms which are guesses, that humans can't have direct knowledge of objective reality and that therefore all information is interpretation, that there is no point of reference and therefore no views are more or less right than other, that science has been wrong in the past and may be wrong again.. Stuff like that..  So in essence, that it's impossible to reach truth. Or that there is no such thing as truth, only approximation and so if there is an objective reality, we can not have access to it." < 
"[deleted] • 15y ago Antares42/asdf4life have it right, in my opinion. Everyone has to make some basic assumptions in order to do anything useful.  Try and make them question their meta-cognition. If they're saying something about the human brain (or some property of the universe?) leads to these "problems" but they are coming to these conclusion in the same universe, using the same sort of brain, how can they claim to be right?";
2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/126qft/is_there_an_objective_reality/?chainedPosts=t3_fttqx%2Ct3_23qdpp : "ReallyNicole • 14y ago Most philosophers believe that there is an objective reality outside of experience, although there is divided opinion on just what kind of epistemic access we have to that reality. A great deal of work in the history of philosophy since Plato has tried to understand the relationship between reality and perception."...
"let's suppose that there is no objective reality and the only things that exist are mental objects (thoughts, impressions, and the like). This view would not necessarily entail that all statements are false (or that anything can be true). More recently in the history of philosophy, since the 20th century or so, philosophers have become very interested in language and what makes a proposition true. Some philosophers (I think Strawson and maybe Quine? Hopefully someone can correct me here.) argue that when I make statements like "There's a table over there." what I'm really saying is something like "I am experiencing table-like sense data coming from over there." Under this view, what makes the proposition true is just that I'm experiencing the table-like sense-data.  Other philosophers hold what is called the correspondence theory of truth; a proposition is true if it corresponds to some feature of reality. So in the table case, that proposition is made true by there really being a table over there. This view may fall apart if there ends up being no objective reality, but the first view I mentioned should have no trouble. Indeed, if we did encounter compelling evidence that there was no objective reality, that might be a very good reason to adopt the first view. 12 Upvote",
"ReallyNicole • 14y ago Right, so you might suppose (like Descartes) that you, at least, exist. Well, what about all of your impressions then? There are two possibilities: 1) you yourself are the source of these impressions or 2) there is some external source for the impressions. If 1 is true, you are God (according to Descartes and other moderns), for you are the source of everything that exists. However, it seems like you'd probably know if you were God, so #2 seems like the best option.  Within 2, you might think that the sources of your impressions are external objects that are either themselves ideal (Berkeley), material, or some mode of existence that we cannot conceive of (Kant). Regarding hallucinations, we might say that these are impressions created by the faulty mind, constructed from the imagination. If you wanted a technical way of telling real impressions from false ones, you might say that real impressions could be received without any prior experience of the world, while fake ones are constructed from past experience. 4 Upvotes",
"truth reduced to two subjective viewpoints, and nobody else can say what happened. Nor can it be known.
I'm sorry if I seem a little disconnected, I am mentally exhausted by thinking about this for so long. But it boils down to this: Our only experience of reality is through our senses. But our senses are fallible. Therefore our perception of reality, is, in some cases, unreliable. I can come to terms with the fact that human beings cannot relate to reality objectively, but how do we know that a reality outside of our senses exists?" 1 Upvote (Kantian perspective.);
2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/scxl4v/how_can_there_be_an_objective_reality_what/ : "confused_blue_whale • 4y ago If you're interested in external world skepticism, it might interest you to read Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, especially the portions where he tries to prove that the external world is objective and not merely subjective while at the same time holding that space and time are "only the pure forms of intuition." From the SEP article on Kant's Transcendental Idealism:  Given its brevity, the “Refutation of Idealism”, added to the “Postulates of empirical thinking in general” in the B Edition, is, line for line, one of the most thoroughly commented upon passages in all of Kant’s writings. Kant’s argument, very briefly, is that the existence of objects in space outside me (“empirically external” objects) is a condition on the possibility of my being conscious of the determinate temporal relations of my inner states. Consequently, it is impossible to be a self-conscious subject without there existing objects in space outside of me, and in being conscious of the temporal relations of my inner states I am immediately conscious of the existence of these objects.[20] The problem of “problematic idealism”—how can I infer the existence of objects outside of me on the basis of my immediate knowledge of my inner states?—is based on a false premise. Furthermore from the SEP article on Kant:  On the basis of this formal idealist conception of self-consciousness, Kant’s argument (at least one central thread of it) moves through two more conditions of self-consciousness in order to establish the objective validity of the categories. The next condition is that self-consciousness requires me to represent an objective world distinct from my subjective representations – that is, distinct from my thoughts about and sensations of that objective world. Kant uses this connection between self-consciousness and objectivity to insert the categories into his argument.";
2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1neq4wt/is_there_any_serious_doubt_truth_doesnt_exist/ : "doubting_yeti • 8mo ago Typically, the postmodern caricature of “Truth doesn’t exist” either isn’t really accurate to the writer’s views (Foucault) or is actually a rather specific claim that “Truth” with a capital T is an unrealistic standard for epistemology (Lyotard). This second claim is about how truths in specific fields are certified in wildly different ways. This “Truth” might not exist, while specific truths may still be valid.   Upvote 71  Downvote    u/I_Hate_This_Website9 avatar I_Hate_This_Website9 • 8mo ago What does Truth with a capital t mean?   Upvote 9  Downvote   doubting_yeti • 8mo ago Beyond what halfwittgenstein wrote, there is an argument going back to at least Max Weber in the 1910s that the various academic fields were specializing and fragmenting. In this view, the philosophical presuppositions of the medieval world were essentially that all knowledge was derived from theology. Art, science, self-knowledge, whatever was all "true" because a divine entity had made it so. This led to the idealization of "Truth" as a unified, singular kind of property that applied to all true statements in roughly the same way.  Once you get to Weber, Husserl, and especially Lyotard, this unification seemed to be breaking apart empirically. Let's take the OPs examples to illustrate. We can agree that the cogito is convincing (at least up to a point) and that the earth orbits the sun. However, how do we know those two unrelated facts? One relies on logical argumentation, and specifically avoids any reference to an external object. The other relies on sophisticated scientific equipment to measure and calculate the earth's velocity. Both are true, and Enlightenment humanism could bridge the gap between the two of them by saying that both are demonstrated through human ingenuity and rationality.  "Postmodernists" (a title very few writers ever accepted, but we might think of Lyotard, Latour, and Haraway as examples) take this observation a few steps further. What connects something like climate modeling, relying on computer simulations, to field ecology, relying on uncontrolled observations, to literary analysis, relying of personal encounters with texts? As academic fields get more and more distant from each other, it gets harder to experts to see how experts in another field can claim to be confident in their claims. Each field might have perfectly good reasons for making the claims they do, but those reasons may not be compatible with other fields of inquiry.  To quickly summarize this phenomenon, some writers have expressed this as the breakdown of "Truth" with a capital T to indicate the loss of a unified, stable foundation for truth claims. I am not aware of any serious philosopher of science, even in the so-called "postmodern" tradition who has actually written "truth doesn't exist," but I have heard the phrase tossed around informally as a shorthand in conversation. 16 Upvotes",
"it's pretty common to adopt a fallibilistic view, to not require absolute certainty in order to count some claim as true.
It would make sense to be a fallibilist about knowledge, where that means not requiring certainty in order for a justified true (etc) belief to count as knowledge. Unlike knowledge, truth (on typical views in epistemology) is a mind-independent matter.",
Ok-Lab-8974 • 8mo ago : "And arguments to the effect that such "denials of truth" refute themselves are normally a bit more developed and nuanced than: "if nothing is true then your theory cannot be either" (targeting a specific theory)." 2 upvotes, <
"strdstengma • 8mo ago Could you please elaborate?  Upvote 1",
"rejectednocomments • 8mo ago Profile Badge for the Achievement Top 1% Commenter Top 1% Commenter Aristotle pointed out that the statement "No statements are true" is self-undermining.   Upvote 80    [deleted] • 8mo ago Simple genius. 8  Upvotes",
"StrangeGlaringEye • 8mo ago You may have a point: most people may understand “truth exists” as simply saying there are true statements. But I guess most philosophers would understand it to say, well, that truth exists!, i.e. the property called truth, of a statement’s being true, exists. A nominalist for example denies that truth exists as a particular case of there being no properties at all, although she usually doesn’t deny there exist true statements.",
"Quidfacis_ • 8mo ago Profile Badge for the Achievement Top 1% Commenter Top 1% Commenter My teacher (who is not a philosophy teacher ) said truth didn’t exist. There are numerous theories of truth and existence, each of which have their own quirks. Your teacher's claim likely results from their using a very idiosyncratic definition of "truth" or "exist".  They could mean capital-T-Truth in the sense of Indubitable Certainty. Sure, we likely do not have access to that. But we do have practicable truth that has functional utility.  It is absolutely the case that one could say that truth does not exist in the same sense that a duck exists. But not everything is a duck. Gravity, causality, love, and pink can be said to exist in a sense different from the existence of a duck. Or one could argue that pink does not exist, by privileging a particular understanding of how "color" and "exist" relate to wavelengths of light.  There is nothing wrong with asking your teacher what they mean by their terms. Maybe they mean that truth does not exist in a similar sense to how pink does not exist. We see pink things, but there is no pink wavelength. Maybe they mean there are truths by which we navigate the world, but there is no truth "thing" to which that notion corresponds in material reality independent of our intents.  You should ask them what they mean. 22  Upvotes", 
"StrangeGlaringEye • 8mo ago One thing metaphysicians are particularly sensitive to is inferences of the form:  There exist Xs; Therefore, there exists the property of being X. This inference form is known to have controversial instances, such as:  There exist non-self-exemplifying properties (for example, the property of being a duck; whatever it is, it's not a duck!) Therefore, there exists the property of being a non-self-exemplifying property The premise is, it seems, true by the lights of anyone who thinks there exist any properties at all. Yet the conclusion is straightforwardly paradoxical: suppose there is such an entity as the property of being a non-self-exemplifying property. Call it R (after Russell). We can prove (exercise for the reader) that R exemplifies itself if and only if R does not exemplify itself: a contradiction.  So inferences of that form are suspicious. Yet, you appear to have employed one:  There exist true statements Therefore, there exists the property of being a true statement, i.e. truth  4  Upvotes";
< 2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1neq4wt/comment/ndu7ndb/?force-legacy-sct=1 : "human mind is capable of holding multiple inconsistent ideas and picking and choosing from them what seems useful based on a limited context. So I started working on my own time on logic systems that could do this.  That's how I got into dialetheism, the idea that some statements can be both true and false. In godel terms, this opens up possibilities of complete but unsound logic. In dialethist systems, "this statement is false" is both true and false.  So I started working on whodunnit mystery puzzles. The last person to see the boss must have killed him. Al says he talked to the boss but bob was there when he came in and left before he left. Bob says Charlie was there when he came in and left before he left. Charlie says Al was there when he came in and left before he left.  A traditional AI system like prolog goes FALSE and gives up. But a good detective draws what conclusions he can and asks follow-up questions and form theories. For instance, maybe they're all liars and they killed the boss together.   1  Upvotes   rejectednocomments • 8mo ago Interesting.  It seems to me that you can avoid dialethism when modeling beleifs by adding belief operators and being careful with inference rules in statements containing such operators.  B(P & ~P)  Is not a genuine contradiction.";
< 2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1neq4wt/comment/ndti714/?force-legacy-sct=1 : " rejectednocomments • 8mo ago "No statements are true" has the form "No A are B"  The negation of "No A are B" is "Some A is B"  So, if "No statements statements are true" is false, then "Some statement is true" is true.   Upvote 4  Downvote    u/LeftBroccoli6795 avatar LeftBroccoli6795 • 8mo ago This might sound dumb, but what if they said all statements, except this one, are not true   Upvote 2  Downvote   rejectednocomments • 8mo ago That's not dumb at all. It mostly preserves the original idea that no statements are true (1 exception means the theory was really close), without being self-undermining in the way the original was.  But, what about "No statements are true except this one, or F", where F is any statement? Now, we can suppose F to be false, but that whole statement would presumably be true.  Or, take "It is not the case that it is not the case that no statements are true except this one", or "All statements are not true except this one". Presumably these would be true as well.",
"GE_Moorepheus • 8mo ago Sure, I accept this, but I'm not sure why the truth-denier needs to. They might just reject all logic.   Upvote 1  Downvote   rejectednocomments • 8mo ago I can certainly concieve of someone who flagrantly rejects basic logical principles, like noncontradiction. Such a person it would be irrefutable, in the rhetorical sense that nothing I, or anyone else could say, would move them.  I don't see how that should give me any reason to draw any conclusion other than that such a person would be completely irrational.   Upvote 2  Downvote    u/GE_Moorepheus avatar GE_Moorepheus • 8mo ago I agree, pretty much. It's not like they can convince me to agree with them, but they are irrefutable, it seems. It bothers me. 1  Upvote";
2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1neq4wt/comment/ndu3elp/?force-legacy-sct=1 : "rejectednocomments • 8mo ago Be wary of an eqoluovication here.  Irrefutable could mean there is no compelling argument against a view, or it could mean there is no argument which could convince a person to give a view up. 1  Upvote";
2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/occhh5/there_is_no_absolute_truth_is_itself_an_absolute/ : " [deleted] • 5y ago • Edited 5y ago This is basically the foundation of the critique of reason and the enlightenment/skepticism which you can find in Hegel as well as Strauss and Adorno. Strauss and Adorno, though being opposed to one another one many issues in political philosophy, were two of the main driving forces of post war philosophy, and more particularly the view that reason had itself become a form of dogmatism. Strauss in particular took the view that this type of skeptical dogmatism was incredibly negative and harmful, being the main cause of nihilism in the West, pointing out that out that philosophical language has been dismantled by modernity. The Greeks were more than capable of expressing what is immediately good and true, and furthermore of seeing the ought as immediate, whereas we have completely lost this ability. MacIntyre picks up this narrative as well in After Virtue, arguing that ethics has been fundamentally dismantled, and that we are operating on mere scraps and fragments left over from the Greeks.  Hegel also had a very interesting critique, which bears a lot of similarity to the prior examples, in that it is also a genealogical account of epistemology. Hegel was probably one of the first to point out the necessity of faith in reason within the Kantian system, as the categories were themselves something that must necessarily be accessed in themselves, and as such can be viewed as the progenitor of the critique of reason. In terms of skepticism, Hegel views it as a temporal state during the historical development of spirit into absolute knowing. It is a state that makes a recurrence several times in this development at different scales, but each time it is marked by a sort of self estrangement, in which it will at different times take different forms, sometimes being relentlessly critical, other times being dogmatic in its own critiquing. But what Hegel points out is that it is not enough to say to skepticism, "you're being critical of everything except skepticism," no, skepticism is an integral part of the development of absolute knowing and of philosophy, as it is the mode in which inadequate ideas, and dogmatic skepticism as well as romantic ironism a la Schlegel fall under this category, are sublated, or surpassed brought closer to being actualized, that is, to coming to be known as absolute. In this way, Hegel both criticized the overly subjective form of skepticism, while also making clear his preference for classical skepticism. This is a good spot to go on a slight tangent and point out that firstly, there are diverging views of Hegel here, some, such as myself, as well as far better Hegel interpreters such as Bernstein, read Hegel as being a tragedian, as taking Hegel to be pessimistic about the capacities of dialectic to actually grasp absolute knowing, as indicated by the fact that Hegel clearly states at the end of the phenomenology that coming to know subject as substance(absolute knowing for Hegel) leads right back to the starting point of the dialectic. There are, however, many interpreters that would disagree with this reading. Secondly, I think it's important to point out a similarity between Strauss and Hegel here, Strauss often pointed out and distinguished between the classical view of the ideal, which had a healthy amount of skepticism in it, and the modern obsession with the real. Strauss points out that the Greek view of the perfect polity was this worldly, and it was a continuous process of becoming, while at the same time being grounded in a certain humbleness about its possibility, as opposed to the modern, purely this worldly view of the impossibility of the ethical life, as Hegel would have called it. So I think that it's important to note the through line from Hegel to later post war philosophers.  So to try to summarize my already profanely condensed summary, the problem of skepticism is an immensely complicated topic, which has a long history behind it, and, indeed, entire philosophical systems have been built in trying to parse out a constructive skepticism as opposed to the nihilism or relativism which you are referring to. So the short answer to your question is that, as a "defeater," yes, that is a good defeater. As a genuine way of overcoming dogmatic skepticism, no, there is a lot of further work that needs to be done to actually solve this problem, and that work needs to itself employ a certain amount of constructive skepticism.   108  Upvotes   tleevz1 • 5y ago That is an informative comment. Thank you. It is funny to think if ever an option other than reason becomes available it cannot make sense.  30  Upvotes", 
"nyanasagara • 5y ago I recommend seeing the fourth chapter of The Non-Existence of the Real World by Jan Westerhoff, which deals with ways that the denier of absolute foundational truths could avoid running into this problem. As an example, one solution he proposes (which itself goes back to the ancient philosopher Buddhapālita) is to engage in philosophizing solely through making reductio arguments against the theories of others, without creating a theory of one's own.   Upvote 32  Downvote   [deleted] OP • 5y ago Thank you, I definitely will.  Upvote 4  Downvote   raews_i_esrever_ton • 5y ago In your opinion, would this specific method resemble the "not this, not that" type of discourse I myself seem to be getting from zen paradoxes as a kind of an 'line of thinking'? Sorry I don't know much about this and I don't have the right terms but it seemed there is some similarity there.   2  Upvotes   nyanasagara • 5y ago It does resemble a series of negations, though the way Buddhapālita (for example) analyzes those negations is designed very specifically so as to not commit oneself to any position while still avoiding dialetheism. I recommend reading chapters 2-4 of another work of Westerhoff's, Nāgārjuna's Madhyamaka, to understand how some ancient philosophers threaded this needle.   Upvote 7  Downvote   raews_i_esrever_ton • 5y ago Much obliged.   1  Upvotes",
"tAoMS123 • 5y ago Or ‘there is an absolute truth and we just don’t know it yet’.  “There is no absolute truth” we have good reason to believe this is a true statement, (and others may have good reason to believe it is false), and we may each have no convincing reason to suspect that we might be wrong.  Only at the end of inquiry will we know the truth of the statement; whether there is or is not an absolute truth.  Our lack of knowledge on this, and the self-contradictory nature of the statement suggests that we have not reached the end of inquiry yet.  I suspect that our knowledge of its truth will very much depend on our meaning of ‘absolute’ and ‘truth’, and on what ‘there is’ actually refers to.  Presumably one would have to know absolute truth in order to know the right meaning, and only then could one claim that to know that “there is an absolute truth” is a true statement.  For the reasons cited above, I can infer that “there is an absolute truth” is a true statement, and even without knowing it is true, I have good reason to accept on faith that it is true.  2 Upvotes",
"SocraticDaemon • 5y ago Nietzsche recognized this very early in his own work and sought to create the Will as a means to overcome this.  3  Upvotes";
< 2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/occhh5/comment/h46dcr1/?force-legacy-sct=1 : " stovenn • 5y ago (G) is beyond my knowledge but (H) is a killer and so I agree that (B3) is false.  If (F) is a generalization of B3, does that make it a secondary truth? By my definition:- yes.  Is the Special Function well defined Not particularly so at present. But I prefer the idea of a set of secondary statements. The truth of such statements depend on the truth of (B3).  or is its definition circular? I'd say that Secondary Statements are hierarchical in the patterns of parent:child relationships and since the child refers back to (depends on) the parent it is circular in that sense." 5 upvotes (It reminds me of Michael Pendlebury's primary and secondary standard of objectivism and his fundamental realism.); <
2026.05.02/reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/occhh5/comment/h4ambaq/?force-legacy-sct=1 : " Thelonious_Cube • 5y ago since the child refers back to (depends on) the parent it is circular in that sense. That worries me as well - again, I think I see Russell's barber out of the corner of my eye  Interesting approach, though!" 2 Upvotes;


Does objective realism exist?:a

Minimal objective realism-note:v
2025.03.13/britannica .com/topic/realism-philosophy/Modest-objective-truth : “Modest” objective truth   inrealism inMetaphysical realism and objective truth : "some realist-antirealist disputes may, as illustrated, turn on the applicability of a strongly realist notion of truth to statements of a certain kind, it does not seem that this can be what is at issue in all cases in which realists assert, and their opponents deny, that statements of the problematic sort are capable of objective truth. Even in mathematics, there can be realist-antirealist disagreements over very elementary statements, such as 172 = 289, which cannot be true in a way which transcends all evidence, because they are effectively decidable by a routine computation.", "There is in fact a notion of truth—the minimal notion defined by the equivalence schema It is true that p if and only if p"; 
; 2025.03.13/quora .com/What-is-objective-realism : "It can be an oxymoron. Reality can only be known from a certain conscious perspective, by a subject in a system. By this definition of reality, reality as experienced by humans cannot be objective.
Alternatively, this can also imply the so-called God’s eye view, an objective perspective, therefore it can mean objective reality. It is possible that such perspective can exist but its metaphysical."
2025.03.13/core-prod.cambridgecore .org/core/books/abs/truth/minimal-realism/6A6230D54E898D3C77DF2F7243B3D465 : "Our review of the various classical theories of truth has led us to suspect either that truth is indefinable or that there is no “substantive” definition of it, hence that only a deflationist account of truth can be given. But deflationism is inadequate and has unwelcome potential consequences. There is thus a tension between the fact that there does not seem to be much more to say about truth than what the equivalence or disquotational schema tell us, and the fact that these obviously do not tell us enough about the concept. But if we pull in the direction of the second intuition, shall we not be obliged to come back to some version of a substantive theory? To put it in Kantian terms, we have a sort of antinomy here, the antinomy of minimalism:
The thesis seems to lead us to a reversal to a substantive position; the antithesis to a reversal to a deflationist position. Is there some stable middle ground? In philosophy, such intermediary positions (for instance, a form of non-reductive-materialism about the mind/ body problem, or compatibilism about freedom and determinism) have proved hard to sustain, precisely because of the permanent pull in opposite directions."; 2025.03.13/philpapers .org/archive/SANRAT-10 .pdf : p.7: "point of present relevance is that, in choice of theory, the scientist appeals to a set of values which provides the basis for the choice. For example, a scientist may choose a theory because they take the theory to be simpler and more accurate than al- ternative theories. In such a case, the values of simplicity and accuracy provide the basis for the scientist’s choice." independent of individual scientist.;
Minimal objective realism-note:a

Common sense and science-note:v
2025.04.25/philarchive .org/archive/SANSRA-17 : p.1: "distinction is proposed between three kinds of common sense: practical skill; widely held belief; basic common sense. It is agreed that common sense in the sense of widely held belief does succumb to the advance of science. It is left open to what extent practical skill varies with scientific change. It is argued that basic common sense is by and large resistant to change due to scientific change.", "observation resides at the level of common sense",
p.7: "Basic common sense: underlying the various practical skills and widely held beliefs, there is a more rudimentary form of common sense. It is typified by our unreflective awareness of the world around us and manifests itself in the routine way in which we deal with objects in our immediate vicinity. Our senses provide us with knowledge of our surroundings on the basis of which we navigate our way around objects in our environment. I will refer to this rudimentary form of common sense as basic common sense.13", "What I describe as “basic common sense” seems to me to be very close to what Armstrong calls “bedrock common sense” (2004, p. 27). Elsewhere, Armstrong writes that “some of the things that have been accounted commonsense have turned out to be erroneous, and present-day commonsense may contain its quota of errors. But it seems to me that there is an inner core of our beliefs which we cannot deny to be cases of knowledge without falling into irrationality in some very strong sense” (1999, p. 78). Again, I think that what Armstrong describes as “an inner core of our beliefs” may be close to what I am calling “basic common sense”.", p.9: "informed by perceptually based knowledge and justified belief.16
The attitude of basic common sense toward the objects and states of affairs which we encounter in the course of daily activity is a realistic one.", "errors relating to perception are dealt with in a routine and typically automatic manner by means of a range of corrective techniques. If the visual appearance of an item seems odd", "practical dealings with the world, we are entitled to a reasonable degree of practical certainty that the world is by and large as it seems to us to be. Only when something goes perceptually awry in specific circumstances do we form doubt. Even then, doubt is restricted to those specific circumstances rather than being generalized in sceptical fashion.", "perceptually formed beliefs lie at the heart of basic common sense" Footnote: 16: "my view, basic common sense is closely involved with practical action. Actions have aims. Aims are typically things that we value. This suggests that value plays a role in basic common sense, or, at the very least, that it interacts with it.", p.10:"“over a few years of living people” arrive at realism about ordinary objects which “is confirmed day by day in their experience” (Devitt, 2002, p. 22)."
Common sense and science-note:a

Common sense realism and scientific realism-note:v
2025.12.27/philarchive .org/archive/SANSRA-17 : 
p.7: "1. Practical skill: common sense is sometimes taken to be involved in the possession or application of practical skill or expertise. Technicians and tradespeople have a range of different practical or technical skills. A person who possesses this kind of common sense is able to solve practical problems which may defeat those who do not have such skills. The ability to solve practical problems in a way not available to those who lack a skill also suggests that there may be a capacity for judgement relating to such problems that is connected with having the skill.
2. Widely held belief: the notion of common sense is sometimes used to refer to a set of beliefs that are widely held by members of a culture at a particular period of time. Such beliefs may appear so obvious to members of the culture that they are simply taken for granted. Some widely held beliefs may be so deeply held that members of a culture may find it difficult or impossible to question the beliefs. This second sense of ‘common sense’ might be thought of as a quasi-anthropological or cultural-historical use of the expression.
3. Basic common sense: underlying the various practical skills and widely held beliefs, there is a more rudimentary form of common sense. It is typified by our unreflective awareness of the world around us and manifests itself in the routine way in which we deal with objects in our immediate vicinity. Our senses provide us with knowledge of our surroundings on the basis of which we navigate our way around objects in our environment. I will refer to this rudimentary form of common sense as basic common sense.",
p.13:"If scientific realists choose the eliminativist option, their work is cut out for them, since an account must be given of the empirical basis of science which does without the perceptual apparatus of ordinary common sense. If scientific realists choose the option of embracing common sense, then it must be shown that the apparent conflict between science and common sense is an illusion. In my view, the first option holds little promise. It is the second option that we should pursue.
On the approach that I have presented here, it is possible to make out a middle path. On the one hand, we may allow that common sense in the sense of the widely held beliefs of a culture at a time is indeed subject to elimination on the basis of scientific developments. On the other hand, the basic common sense enacted in our ordinary everyday practical dealings with the world around us survives the advance of science. Not only does it survive, but we have good reason to believe in the dictates of basic common sense, since they are in large part justified on the basis of perceptual experience. Indeed, I would go further than this. Basic common sense provides us with what David Armstrong has called the “epistemic base” (1999, p. 77). It is the base on which all other knowledge, including scientific knowledge, is built."
Common sense realism and scientific realism-note:a

Common sense physics-note:v
2025.04.17/goodmath.scientopia .org/2008/01/01/common-sense-math-is-the-root-of-all-evil-including-evolution/ : "“common sense” guys, that doesn’t matter. Because
math is bad. Y’see, the whole problem with modern physics is that they waste way too much time on that math stuff anyway. After all, the number one problem with new scientific theories is “Physical models of matter were replaced with mathematical equations”."; 2025.04.17/umaine .edu/per/wp-content/uploads/sites/436/2009/12/WittmannPhD.pdf : p.26: "Halloun and Hestenes state that “each student entering a first course in physics possesses a system of beliefs and intuitions about physical phenomena derived from extensive personal experience. This system functions as a common sense theory of the physical world which the student uses to interpret his experience.” The authors use three descriptions for the most common student responses: Newtonian physics, Aristotelian physics, and impetus physics.
A single physical situation, such as Clement’s coin toss (used in modified form by Halloun and Hestenes), can be described using all three theories. A Newtonian response would describe a constant force being exerted downward on the coin, causing an acceleration which causes a change in velocity such that the coin slows and reverses direction. As an example of an Aristotelian response, Halloun and Hestenes describe the idea that a force must act in the direction of motion to keep an object moving, and that the “force does not move an object unless it overcomes (exceeds) the object’s inertia, an intrinsic resistance (mass) which is not distinguished from weight.” An example of an impetus response would be “when an object is thrown, the active agent imparts to the object a certain immaterial motive power which sustains the body’s motion until it has been dissipated due to resistance by the medium.” Thus, the motive power eventually dies away, so that the object no longer moves. The impetus theory has been described in detail by McCloskey. He states, “the act of setting an object in motion imparts to the object an internal force or ‘impetus’ that serves to maintain the motion ... [A] moving object’s impetus gradually dissipates.”7
Most students entering the course are not consistent in their use of theories. Halloun and Hestenes use their observations of student responses to describe students as predominantly Aristotelian (18%), predominantly impetus type (65%) or predominantly Newtonian (18%). Most of the students using theories inconsistently have predominantly non-Newtonian ideas. As the authors state, “no doubt much of the incoherence in the student CS systems is the result of vague and undifferentiated",
p.27:"concepts.” Common incorrect responses given during interviews were: “every motion has a cause,” elaborating with statements such as “a force of inertia,” “the force of velocity,” or “it’s still got some force inside” (this force is seemingly in the process of getting used up as time passes, showing evidence of the impetus theory)."..."weakness of the classification scheme used by Halloun and Hestenes is that they import “a ready-made classification scheme” taken from Newtonian mechanics.", p.94: " naïve (pre-instructional),
• novice (post-instructional), and
• appropriate formal (or community consensus)
facets of knowledge. The novice facet of knowledge in each cas", 
p.52 & p.164: "McCloskey, M, “Naïve theories of motion,” in Mental Models, edited by D. Gentner and A. Stevens (Lawrence Erlbaum, NJ 1983) 299-324."; 
2025.04.17/journals.indexcopernicus .com/api/file/viewByFileId/894367 : Effect of Naïve Impetus Application Theory on Misconceptions of Newtonian Motion among Nigerian Secondary School Students : "Researches had shown that every learner especially at introductory physics class begins the learning of physics with a well-established system of common senses belief about how the physical world works. This system of belief is known as naïve impetus theory is gathered from the environment of the learner over the years. It is also entrenched into the system of thought process to the extent that it is very difficult to unseat. Simple common sense belief about motion is incompatible with Newtonian concept of motion."; 2025.04.17/researchgate .net/profile/Sara-Green-3/publication/310814065_Science_and_common_sense_perspectives_from_philosophy_and_science_education/links/5a9e9816aca2726eed577691/Science-and-common-sense-perspectives-from-philosophy-and-science-education.pdf?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIn19 : "Hoyningen- Huene embraces continuity between these in his characterization of scientific knowledge as an extension of everyday knowledge, distinguished by an increase in systematicity. On the other, he argues that scientific knowledge often comes to deviate from common sense as science develops. Specifically, he argues that a departure from common sense is a price we may have to pay for increased systematicity.", "He stresses that many scientific insights are inaccessible to direct perception or even conflict with what we experience. For instance, whereas the Aristotelian tradition of physics can be seen as a successful specification of common sense, he argues that the same cannot be said for examples from modern physical theories involving claims about anti-matter, string-theory, relativity, universes in multiple dimensions, space being bent etc.", 2025.04.17/strangebeautiful .com/other-texts/butterfield-earman-philphys-hndbk-a-b.pdf : p.394: 5.5.2 ‘Uncommon Sense’ Interpretations
5.5.2.1 Quantum Logic Interpretations : "lattice of subspaces of a Hilbert space, i.e., the lattice of ‘propositions’ about a physical system, can, prima facie, be interpreted logically. Quantum logic interpretations take this idea seriously, and understand quantum theory to necessitate a revolutionary change from classical to quantum logic.73
One way to characterize the difference between classical and quantum logic is in terms of the failure of distributivity (§7.4.3) — the classical and quantum lattices of propositions are otherwise structurally (logically) the same."; 2025.04.17/arxiv .org/pdf/2305.01560 : p.3: common sense = BFO, "This is a top-level ontology used especially in the life sciences which has been documented as an
international standard in ISO/IEC 21838-2. See [2]. The authors of BFO did not see the need to include mathematical entities in the coverage domain of the ontology. In particular the authors of BFO did not include any room in the ontology for the treatment of sets.", p.30: "ISO/IEC 21838-2. Information technology — Top-level ontologies (TLO) — Part 2: Basic Formal Ontology (BFO). New York: International Standardization Orga- nization, 2020."
Common sense physics-note:a

Kinematic geometry-note:v
2025.04.02/sciencegate .app/keyword/379012 :  "Kinematic Geometry of the PnP Robots Parallel PnP Robots - Research on Intelligent Manufacturing ◽   10.1007/978-981-15-6671-4_2 ◽   2020 ◽   pp. 17-56 Author(s):   Guanglei Wu ◽   Huiping Shen Keyword(s):   Kinematic Geometry"; 2025.04.02/grafiati .com/en/literature-selections/kinematic-geometry/journal/ ; graz.elsevierpure .com:443/en/projects/kinematic-geometry-and-robotics/publications/; www4.geometry .net/detail/math_discover/geometry_computer.html : "16. Geometry In Action: CAD 
Related areas computer graphics, computer aided manufacturing, solid modeling, constraing solving, architecture, VLSI design. Academic CAD sites on the web ( primarily VLSI rather than other kinds": "Kinematics-driven Geometric Modeling: A Framework for Simultaneous Sculptured Surface Design and CNC Tool Path Generation , Q. Jeffrey Ge, 5th MSI Worksh. Comp. Geom., makes a case for tighter coupling between CAD and CAM."; 2025.04.02/risc.jku .at/research_topic/symbolic-methods-in-kinematics/ : "Symbolic Methods in Kinematics", "techniques from algebraic geometry and symbolic computation to various problems"; astrj .com/Keyword-kinematic+geometry/95509 :Keyword Kinematic geometry ; 2025.04.02/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Hyperbolic_geometry : "Hyperbolic geometry enters special relativity through rapidity, which stands in for velocity, and is expressed by a hyperbolic angle. The study of this velocity geometry has been called kinematic geometry. The space of relativistic velocities has a three-dimensional hyperbolic geometry, where the distance function is determined from the relative velocities of "nearby" points (velocities)."; 2025.04.03/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Non-Euclidean_geometry# Kinematic_geometrics : 
Kinematic geometry-note:a

Newtonian physics contradicted:v
2025.04.02/sciencegate .app/keyword/379012 : "Here, we tested whether the perception of apparent motion is best characterized by Newtonian physics or kinematic geometry. Participants completed a target detection task while Pacmen- shaped objects were presented in succession to create the perception of apparent motion. We found that target detection was impaired when apparent motion, as predicted by kinematic geometry, not Newtonian physics, obstructed the target’s location."

Newtonian physics contradicted:a

Newtonian & lagrangian in common:v
2025.02.29: DebateArena-Teacher: Hard: exact center with same distance can be seem as variations mechanics (Maupertius's principle). Mechanical system, system dynamics. Kinetics, statics, dynamics, dynamics unites all 3 of those the most. Classical field theory is between Lagrangian electromagnetism & Newtonian gravity.
AI is confidently: Force+Energy=Work is defined as product of force applied over distance, which signifies the transfer of energy. Foundational in mechanics as bridge between those as key principle.
What do Lagrangians and Newtonians agree? Fundamental principles of classical mechanics, particularly that the notion of objects can be described by equations derived from something, & these motions are governed by consistent laws of nature. They occur on importance of conservation laws in analyzing and predicting the behavior of physical systems. Experimental physics.
So experimental, variational physics? Yes, it embodies Lagrangian, Newtonian, applied, & theoretical physics. Experimental variational mechanics is too focused on empiricism and more Newtonian, yet experimential variational dynamics not. Teacher-AI prefers ex. va. dynamics. Earlier Howard-AI uses verification a lot in center between true/false-determinant-mind-independent-perceptionism & objectivity. Experimentation verifies.
"Well done! You're mastered the art of persuasion. Ready for your next challenge?", 2025.04.04: *But dynamics is part of mechanics from Applied Mechanics Reviews.; 2025.04.04/admissions.g30.nagoya-u.ac .jp/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Course-List-for-Engineering-Physics-Masters-Program.pdf : Basic Courses: Core Applied Physics, Core Materials Physics, Lectors: different individuals, Specialized Courses: Seminar: Physical Engineering Seminar 1A, Lector: Faculty of Physical Engineering; 2025.04.04/webhome.phy.duke .edu/~rgb/Class/intro_physics_1/intro_physics_1.pdf : p.13: "Week 2: Newton’s Laws: Continued": p.14:  Closer to Newtonian because of more focus on force. "2.4: Non-Inertial Reference Frames – Pseudoforces"?, Center between Newtonian and Lagrangian?: "2.4.1: Identifying Inertial Frames", "2.4.2: Advanced: General Relativity and Accelerating Frames", 1st mention of "energy" at "Week 3: Work and Energy", p.18: Last Chapter: "III: Applications of Mechanics", p.76: "actual modern physics is non-Newtonian quantum mechanics", p.96: First "scalar". p.207: "Energy is a scalar", p.211 of 661: "3.3.1: Force from Potential Energy": p.213: only page to mention "Lagrang"; 2025.04.04/ethz .ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/phys/department/studies/bachelor/2022-10-BSC_content_all_final.pdf : "Differential- und Integralrechnung: Differentialrechnung, Taylorreihen, Partielle Ableitung, Integralrechnung
Vektoren: Vektoralgebra, Multiplikation mit einem Skalar, Skalarprodukt, äusseres Produkt und Vektorprodukt, kartesische Basisvektoren und Vektorkomponenten, Ableitung von Vektoren, Koordinatensysteme, Basiswechsel", p.10: "Allgemeine Mechanik": Newtonsche Mechanik: Intertialsysteme
Schwerpunktsatz und Konzept der Masse Newton'sches Prinzip
Galileische Relativitätsprinzip Beschleunigte Bezugssysteme>  Zweikörper-Systeme: "Allgemeine Bewegungsgleichungen Kepler-Problem" < Lagrange Formulierung: Minimierungsprobleme Euler-Lagrange-Gleichgungen
Lagrange Formalismus und Multiplikatoren Zwangsbedingungen
Prinzip der stationären Wirkung; 2025.04.28/physics.stackexchange .com/questions/9/why-should-an-action-integral-be-stationary-on-what-basis-did-hamilton-state-th/821469 : "1 Derivation of the work-energy theorem from 𝐹=𝑚𝑎", "force-acceleration principle", "arrive at the work-energy theorem", "Historically: for several centuries, from the time of Huygens to the time of Hamilton, the concept of 'living force' was used, which was defined as 𝑚𝑣2 m v 2 . It was in the 1850's that the physics community shifted to a new name and a new definition: 12𝑚𝑣2 1 2 m v 2 . The benefit of that shift: by defining kinetic energy as an integral (integral of 𝑚𝑎 m a  with respect to the position coordinate) the concept of kinetic energy is defined in terms of the work-energy theorem.  Potential energy is defined as the negative of work done. When the expression for work done is well defined we have: during interconversion between potential energy and kinetic energy the amount of change of potential energy matches the amount of change of kinetic energy:  Δ𝐸𝑝+Δ𝐸𝑘=0(1.10) (1.10)	Δ E p +Δ E k =0   The importance of the concepts of kinetic energy and potential energy cannot be overstated.".; 2025.04.28/sites.astro.caltech .edu/~golwala/ph106ab/ph106ab_notes.pdf : p.73: "This can be seen by simply remembering that two initial conditions – qk(t = 0) and q ̇k(t = 0) are required to specify a solution of Newton’s second law because it is a second-order differential equation. Higher-order derivatives are not independent variables because Newton’s second law relates the higher-order derivatives to {qk} and {q ̇k}. The independence of {qk} and {q ̇k} is a reflection of the structure of Newton’s second law, not just a mathematical theorem.", p.369: Under Lagrangian mechanics: Independence of qk and q ̇k and Nothing Else : "Because Newton’s second law is a second-order differential equation, it establishes a relationship  ̈ ̇ between ⃗r and the force. In general, the force can depend on ⃗r and ⃗r. Thus, Newton’s second  ̇ law establishes a relationship between the second (and higher-order) derivatives of ⃗r and ⃗r and ⃗r.  ̇ Thus, at most ⃗r and ⃗r are independent. Because Newton’s second law is a differential equation, it  ̇ holds that two initial conditions are required to specify the motion, ⃗r(t = 0) and ⃗r(t = 0). Since  ̇ there is complete freedom in these two quantities, ⃗r and ⃗r can be treated as independent."
Newtonian & Lagrangian in common:a

Compromise of common sense and modern science:v
2025.05.09/Encyclopedia of physics, vol_3-1_Principles of classical – S_ (Editor), Flugge – Springer, 1960 – Springer – Verlag: p.9: Newtonian dynamics may be successful by kinetic theory of gases & celestial mechanics. Relative speeds are not small compare to light-speed, atomic size. Since high speeds are attainable in a laboratory only for very light particles, these two conditions are not distinct practically from one another....boundary where Newtonian must be replaced by relativistic dynamics, classical -> quantum dynamics.;

Compromise of common sense and modern science:a

Difference between common sense and science:v
2026.06.17/modernsociety .org : "Modern science created the technical possibilities, but organizational talents created the large, often multi-national companies which gave us cars, TV's, computers, transportation services, communication services and many other things at very modest prices, to an extent unimaginable only 200 years ago." (The ancient empires in an European common-sense-dominated era succeeded with organizational talents more, early 21st century with science. Early 21st century lives in a world full of technological possibilities and poor organization talents. Organizational talents with their economically-engaging companies with mixed but slightly more capitalism in USA as status quo aligns with economically slightly more right-wing republicans and both 2 mainstream US parties's sides, mainly Democrats and Republicans as roughly same amount of trustworthy, more left-wing democrats and people in general trust science, especially personal nurses.)
Difference between common sense and science:a

Du Châtelet-note:v
2026.03.22/Émilie Du Châtelet and the Foundations of Physical Science
Brading, Katherine : p.24: "Du Châtelet published a review of this book (1738), and in the Preface to the Foundations she makes explicit her intention of going",
p.25: "beyond the “narrow boundaries” of Voltaire’s exposition (2009, 1.VI).",
p.26: "Other work completed or in progress at the time includes her essays on optics and on liberty, and while not published during her lifetime both circulated in manuscript form.",
p.26-27: Samuel König complained to Émilie Du Châtelet that she does plagiarism after learning from König because of abrupt suspension of printing of her Foundations-book in Winter 1738-1739 according to p.26. Philosophical agenda stayed the same.,
p.28: "Foundations was resubmitted for publication in September 1740 and appeared in print in December of that year.",
"Du Châtelet had intended anonymous publication, in order to get an impartial response to the book, but this intention was thwarted by König who revealed her authorship shortly before publication. Nevertheless, Du Châtelet sent copies of the book to leading figures, and it was positively reviewed in the Journal des sçavans (in two parts, the first in December 1740 and the second in March 1741), with extensive quotations. The ongoing influence of the text, both direct and indirect (e.g. through extracts reproduced in the Encyclopedia of Diderot and d’Alembert; see earlier), requires further research. Suisky (2012, p. 153) offers the following assessment: “The extraordinary role Du Châtelet’s Institutions de physique played in the eighteenth century is… confirmed by… the esteem her treatise met in the public that was probably",
p.29: "surpassed only by Euler’s Lettres à une princesse d’Allemagne”.
In late April 1740, Du Châtelet wrote in a letter to Frederick of Prussia that the idea of writing such a book began with lessons that she prepared for her young son, Florent-Louis, who was ten years old at the time (see Zinsser, 2006, p. 165). Of this, Wade (1969, p. 277) writes, “Although Mme du Châtelet adopted early the fiction of an essay on physics written for her son, in reality what she was doing was producing a text on physics”." [Euler's Letters to a German Princess (2026.03.22/epflpress. org/produit/32/9782880745240/lettres-a-une-princesse-d-allemagne : "1760 et 1762 et publiées à St. Pétersbourg de 1768 à 1772") later on in this century was probably more popular than Émile Du Châtelet's Foundation of Physics],
"“more likely that she thought of herself as a successor to Rohault in the Cartesian enterprise of writing serious but comprehensible philosophy. Her stated goal was not to convert her public to the party of",
p.30: "philosophy, as Fontanelle wished to do, but rather to add to the stock of knowledge in a collective search for truth.  That being said, I also agree with Kawashima (2004) that Du Châtelet did not model her text on either Rohault’s textbook or Descartes’s Principles of Philosophy (though see Detlefsen, 2014 and forthcoming). Rather, the structure and list of topics is that found in the Newtonian texts explicitly recommended by Voltaire in his Elements: books by Keill, Musschenbroek, ’s Gravesande, and Pemberton (see Appendix 1 for details). I take these to have been her model.15 As we shall see in Chapter 2, all of these texts begin with considerations of method. The topics covered thereafter match those of the Foundations (see Appendix 1).16 I believe that it is appropriate to approach Du Châtelet’s Foundations as being primarily intended to provide French readership with a book of physics modeled on these Latin- and English-language texts. The most striking difference between these N“Newtonian texts and the Foundations is Du Châtelet’s inclusion of metaphysical commitments, for",
p.31-32: "which she explicitly refers to Leibniz and Wolff.17
It is all too easy, however, to read the terms “physics” and “metaphysics” with their 21st-century meanings and thereby fall into misunderstandings.18 Du Châtelet uses the terminology of physics and metaphysics to mark a distinction, but we must not assume that where we might tend to draw the line between them is where Du Châtelet saw the line fall. Hazards abound, exacerbated by reading a French text in English translation. The term “physics” did not mean then what it means now. An alternative English phrase in use at the time might be “natural philosophy” as a translation of “physique”, but since there was disagreement at the time over what falls under the remit of natural philosophy, this label does not resolve our problems. In the face of this difficulty, I think that Musschenbroek’s characterization is helpful. According to Musschenbroek (1744),19
[Physics] considers the space of the whole universe, and all bodies contained in it; enquires into their nature, attributes, properties, actions, passions, situation, order, powers, causes, effects, modes, magnitudes, origins; proving these mathematically, as far as may be done
whereas
[Metaphysics] explains such general things as are common to all created beings." (Common like common sense maybe.) "As what is being, substance, mode, relation, possible, impossible, necessary, contingent, etc.
On this division of responsibilities, Du Châtelet’s text is primarily about physics: it is about the nature of bodies and their properties, actions, and passions; and, most importantly, it is about causes. Indeed, physics (as understood at the time) was most importantly a search for causes, and a successful physics provided causal knowledge concerning the behaviors of bodies. In titling her book Foundations of Physics, Du Châtelet signaled her concern with causal knowledge.20
With this information in hand, we should expect the method that she develops in her early chapters to be directed toward securing knowledge of causes"
Du Châtelet-note:a

Newton-note:v
2025.08.11/plato.stanford .edu/entries/newton-philosophy : "decades later, philosophers, mathematicians and experimenters challenged Newton’s approach. This frequently upset Newton, who had a famous, lifelong aversion to intellectual debate and controversy. But in a sense, it helped to ensure the importance of Newton’s ideas for philosophy. Obviously, Newton never wrote a philosophical text on the order of Descartes’s Meditations, Locke’s Essay, or Spinoza’s Ethics. He never produced what the lumières who studied him would have called a “system” of philosophy. But the intense controversies produced by his mathematical, empirical and philosophical methods and ideas continually prompted him to broach philosophical topics (Janiak 2015). As a result, he was widely considered a leading philosopher throughout the Enlightenment.", "Indeed, before the early nineteenth century, people like Newton were called “philosophers”, or more specifically, “natural philosophers”. During the seventeenth century, and well into the eighteenth (at least until 1750, if not later), figures like Newton worked within the century’s old tradition of natural philosophy. The modern disciplines of physics, chemistry, biology and so on, had not yet been formed. (The words ‘physics’ in English, ’physique’ in French, and ‘physica’ in Latin were often used, but had a very broad meaning, like “natural philosophy.”)"

Newtonian physics-note:v
2025.04.04/ 2020-08-10: Franky De Bruyne: Mechanical dynamics (Newtonian and Lagrangian mechanics): video 2.2 Newton fictitious forces: 11:10 fictions forces are inertial forces. Newton's 3 laws are for ideal single mass/point particle. As Newton's extension, Euler's 3 laws of motion are for collection of masses/particles. 12:15 (Newtonian physics) Inertial frames are privileged over non-inertial frames because they do not have physics whose causes are outside of this system, while non-inertial frames do.; 2025.04.04/ethz .ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/phys/department/studies/bachelor/2022-10-BSC_content_all_final.pdf : p.6: "Galilei'sche (oder Newton'sche) Relativitätstheorie"
Newtonian physics-note:a

Lagrangian mechanics-note:v
sites.astro.caltech .edu/~golwala/ph106ab/ph106ab_notes.pdf : p.108: "While it may seem that both this section and the previous one were new formulations of me- chanics, one must realize that the Lagrangian mechanics introduced in the previous chapter derived directly from Newton’s second law. The use of constraints, generalized variables, the Lagrangian, and the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation should be consider “technology,” not new physics. This section, on the other hand, provides a new principle on which to base mechanics, an alternative to Newton’s second law.
Another difference between the last section and this one is that, in the last section, we continued the Newtonian mechanical tendency to derive the equations of motion from a “differential principle” – i.e., the equations of motion only care about what is happening locally. As Goldstein says, the Principle of Least Action is different in that it is an “integral principle,” determining the equations of motion from a requirement on the entire motion of the system between a pair of start and end times.
The naming and history are no doubt becoming very confusing. The line of reasoning presented in the previous section was due to Lagrange and so is known as Lagrangian mechanics. But Lagrange was also responsible for the application of variational calculus to mechanics, and so the material derived in this section is also sometimes referred to as Lagrangian dynamics. But, in fact, the Principle of Least Action was formulated by Hamilton, not Lagrange. The confusion will continue when we embark on Hamiltonian dynamics in the next section"
Lagrangian mechanics-note:a

Kinematics-note:v
2025.05.04/link.springer .com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-39872-8 :"subject has its roots in geometry, mechanics and mechanical engineering and how it became in the 19th century a coherent field of research, which Ampère coined the name kinematic., 17th math motion plays an important role as well, and the book pays ample attention to it., Concept of instantaneous velocity, unknown by the Greeks, etc was introduced in the late Middle Ages & in 18th century, when classical mechanics was formed, kinematical theorems conceding the distribution of velocity in a solid body moving in space were proved. The book shows that in the 19th century, against the background of the Industrial Revolution, the theory of machines and thus the kinematics of mechanisms received a great deal of attention.; 2025.05.04/techanimatic .net : 2019-01-13: "According to the definition given by Ampère, kinematics is the branch of mechanics concerned with the motion of objects without reference to the forces which cause the motion. Thus, kinematics is basically an abstract topic. To illustrate in practice the motion produced by kinematic systems, Franz Reuleaux, considered as the Father of modern kinematics, supervised the construction of a large collection of physical models.
Today, computer animations are particularly suited to fulfill such an illustrative purpose." It's this website's purpose.; 2025.05.04/britannica .com/biography/Andre-Marie-Ampere :  "André-Marie Ampère (born January 20, 1775, Lyon, France—died June 10, 1836, Marseille) was a French physicist who founded and named the science of electrodynamics, now known as electromagnetism. His name endures in everyday life in the ampere, the unit for measuring electric current.", "Ampère, who was born into a prosperous bourgeois family during the height of the French Enlightenment, personified the scientific culture of his day. His father, Jean-Jacques Ampère, was a successful merchant, and also an admirer of the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whose theories of education, as outlined in his treatise Émile, were the basis of Ampère’s education. Rousseau argued that young boys should avoid formal schooling and pursue instead an “education direct from nature.” Ampère’s father actualized this ideal by allowing his son to educate himself within the walls of his well-stocked library. French Enlightenment masterpieces such as Georges-Louis Leclerc, comte de Buffon’s Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière (begun in 1749) and Denis Diderot and Jean Le Rond d’Alembert’s Encyclopédie (volumes added between 1751 and 1772) thus became Ampère’s schoolmasters. In addition, he used his access to the latest mathematical books to begin teaching himself advanced mathematics at age 12. His mother was a devout woman, so Ampère was also initiated into the Catholic faith along with Enlightenment science. The French Revolution (1787–99) that erupted during his youth was also formative. Ampère’s father was called into public service by the new revolutionary government, becoming a justice of the peace in a small town near Lyon. Yet when the Jacobin faction seized control of the Revolutionary government in 1792, Jean-Jacques Ampère resisted the new political tides, and he was guillotined on November 24, 1793, as part of the Jacobin purges of the period.", "French Revolution brought these personal traumas, it also created new institutions of science that ultimately became central to André-Marie Ampère’s professional success. He took his first regular job in 1799 as a modestly paid mathematics teacher, which gave him the financial security to marry and father his first child, Jean-Jacques, the next year. (Jean-Jacques Ampère eventually achieved his own fame as a scholar of languages.) Ampère’s maturation corresponded with the transition to the Napoleonic regime in France, and the young father and teacher found new opportunities for success within the technocratic structures favoured by the new French emperor.", "1802 Ampère was appointed a professor of physics and chemistry at the École Centrale in Bourg-en-Bresse. He used his time in Bourg to research mathematics, producing Considérations sur la théorie mathématique du jeu (1802; “Considerations on the Mathematical Theory of Games”), a treatise on mathematical probability that he sent to the Paris Academy of Sciences in 1803. After the death of his wife in July 1803, Ampère moved to Paris, where he assumed a tutoring post at the new École Polytechnique in 1804. Despite his lack of formal qualifications, Ampère was appointed a professor of mathematics at the school in 1809. In addition to holding positions at this school until 1828, in 1819 and 1820 Ampère offered courses in philosophy and astronomy, respectively, at the University of Paris, and in 1824 he was elected to the prestigious chair in experimental physics at the Collège de France. In 1814 Ampère was invited to join the class of mathematicians in the new Institut Impériale, the umbrella under which the reformed state Academy of Sciences would sit. Ampère engaged in a diverse array of scientific inquiries during these years leading up to his election to the academy", "Had Ampère died before 1820, his name and work would likely have been forgotten. In that year, however, Ampère’s friend and eventual eulogist François Arago demonstrated before the members of the French Academy of Sciences the surprising discovery of Danish physicist Hans Christiaan Ørsted that a magnetic needle is deflected by an adjacent electric current. Ampère was well prepared to throw himself fully into this new line of research.  Ampère immediately set to work developing a mathematical and physical theory to understand the relationship between electricity and magnetism. Extending Ørsted’s experimental work, Ampère showed that two parallel wires carrying electric currents repel or attract each other, depending on whether the currents flow in the same or opposite directions, respectively. He also applied mathematics in generalizing physical laws from these experimental results. Most important was the principle that came to be called Ampère’s law, which states that the mutual action of two lengths of current-carrying wire is proportional to their lengths and to the intensities of their currents. Ampère also applied this same principle to magnetism, showing the harmony between his law and French physicist Charles Augustin de Coulomb’s law of magnetic action. Ampère’s devotion to, and skill with, experimental techniques anchored his science within the emerging fields of experimental physics.", "Ampère also offered a physical understanding of the electromagnetic relationship, theorizing the existence of an “electrodynamic molecule” (the forerunner of the idea of the electron) that served as the constituent element of electricity and magnetism. Using this physical understanding of electromagnetic motion, Ampère developed a physical account of electromagnetic phenomena that was both empirically demonstrable and mathematically predictive. In 1827 Ampère published his magnum opus, Mémoire sur la théorie mathématique des phénomènes électrodynamiques uniquement déduite de l’experience (Memoir on the Mathematical Theory of Electrodynamic Phenomena, Uniquely Deduced from Experience), the work that coined the name of his new science, electrodynamics, and became known ever after as its founding treatise. In recognition of his contribution to the making of modern electrical science, an international convention signed in 1881 established the ampere as a standard unit of electrical measurement"..."1827 publication of Ampère’s synoptic Mémoire brought to a close his feverish work over the previous seven years on the new science of electrodynamics. The text also marked the end of his original scientific work. His health began to fail, and he died while performing a university inspection, decades before his new science was canonized as the foundation stone for the modern science of electromagnetism."; 2025.05.04/modern-physics .org/galilean-transformation : "Galilean Transformation forms the cornerstone of classical mechanics, bridging the concepts of kinematics, relativity, and motion.", "This principle is fundamental to the study of classical mechanics and has implications in understanding relative motion before the advent of Einstein’s theory of relativity.", "Kinematics, the branch of mechanics that describes motion, uses the Galilean Transformation to analyze how the motion of an object appears from different inertial frames. It relies on the assumption that time is absolute and the same for all observers, irrespective of their state of motion. This simplification is practical for everyday speeds but fails at speeds approaching the speed of light, as shown by later developments in physics."; 2025.05.04/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei : "Galileo has been called the father of observational astronomy,[9] modern-era classical physics,[10] the scientific method,[11] and modern science.[12]", "Galileo later defended his views in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems (1632), which appeared to attack and ridicule Pope Urban VIII, thus alienating both the Pope and the Jesuits, who had both strongly supported Galileo up until this point.[14] He was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", and forced to recant. He spent the rest of his life under house arrest.[17][18] During this time, he wrote Two New Sciences (1638), primarily concerning kinematics and the strength of materials.[19]", "It was while Galileo was under house arrest that he dedicated his time to one of his finest works, Two New Sciences. Here he summarised work he had done some forty years earlier, on the two sciences now called kinematics and strength of materials, published in Holland to avoid the censor. This book was highly praised by Albert Einstein.[169] As a result of this work, Galileo is often called the "father of modern physics"."; 2025.04.05/amsi .org .au/ESA_Senior_Years/SeniorTopic3/3i/3i_4history_1.html : Kinematics before Newton: "There is no surviving evidence that Archimedes, or the other truly great Greek mathematicians Euclid and Apollonius, studied kinematics. But so much of Archimedes' work has been lost that it is hard to know.
The representation of quantities by lengths and areas has a long history. In the 14th century, Nicholas Oresme represented time and velocity by lengths. He invented a type of coordinate geometry before Descartes.
The need for mathematical descriptions of velocity contributed to the development of the concept of the derivative. In the 14th century, scholastic philosophers at Merton College, Oxford, studied motion with constant acceleration and deduced what is now known as the Merton rule:
An object with constant acceleration travels the same distance as it would have if it had constant velocity equal to the average of its initial and final velocities.", "17th century, Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) and others discovered that, in a void, all falling objects have the same constant acceleration, and so their motion may be determined by using the Merton rule.", "1604, Galileo discovered that falling bodies are uniformly accelerated. He then worked out a number of mathematical consequences of this fact, some of which could be confirmed by experiment. His work was held back by primitive equipment — for example, there were no stop watches available. Part of his work concerned projectiles, and he was aware that their paths are parabolic."
Kinematics-note:a

Electromagnetism-note:v
2025.05.02/link.springer .com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-030-63101-7_1-1 : Magnetism is a microcosm of the history of science over more than two millennia... First came the harnessing if the directional nature of the magnetic force in the compass that led to the exploration of the planet in the fifteenth century... Discovering relation between electricity and magnetism., ...emergence of magnetic science demanded imagination and observational acuity, which led to the theory of classical electrodynamics. Magnetic field is associated with electric currents & angular momentum of charged particles in special materials. Our current understanding of the magnetism of electrons in solids is rooted in quantum mechanics and relativity. Since 1980 has fundamental theory a rational design of new functional magnetic materials and the conception of new spin electronic devices that can be reproduced in ever smaller scales, leading most notably to the disruptive, 60-year exponential growth of magnetic information storage.; 2025.05.02/Newton.ex.ac .uk/teaching/CDHW/EM/CW960128-3.pdf : Static electricity since Ancient Greece.  Static magnetism with compass in China BC 2636 & AD 1100. Greek texts circa BC 800.; 2025.05.02/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Electricity: Electricity would remain little more than an intellectual curiosity for millennia until 1600, when the English scientist William Gilbert wrote De Magnete, in which he made a careful study of electricity and magnetism, distinguishing the lodestone effect from static electricity produced by rubbing amber., Further work in 17th & early 18th century by Otto von Guericke, Robert Boyle, Stephen Gray & C. F. du Fay. Later in the 18th century, Benjamin Franklin conducted extensive research in electricity, selling his possessions to fund his work. In June 1752 he is reputed to have attached a metal key to the bottom of a dampened kite string and flown the kite in a storm-threatened sky. ... While the early 19th century had seen rapid progress in electrical science, the late 19th century would see the greatest progress in electrical engineering. Through such people as Alexander Graham Bell, Ottó Bláthy, Thomas Edison, Galileo Ferraris, Oliver Heaviside, Ányos Jedlik..., Werner von Siemens, Joseph Sean,... Nikola Tesla... electricity turned from a scientific curiosity into an essential tool for modern life.; en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Magnetism : 1600, William Gilbertpublished his De Magnete, Magneticisque Corporibus, er de Magni Magnete Tellure(In the Magnet and Magneic Bodies, and on the Great Magnet the Earth). In this work he describes many of his experiments with his model earth called the terrella. From his experiments, he concluded that the Earth was itself magnetic and that this was the reason  compasses pointed north whereas, previously, some believed that it was the pole star Polars or a large magnetic island on the North Pole that attracted the compass.,
Leonardo Garzoni'd only extant work, the Due trattati sopra la natura, e le qualità della calamita (Two treatises on the nature and qualities of the magnet), is the first known example of a modern treatment of magnetic phenomena. Written in the years near 1580 and never published, the treatise had a wide diffusion. Harpunieren is referred to as an expert in magnetism by Niccolò Cabeo, whose Philosophia Magnetically (1629) is just a re-adjustment of Garzoni'd work. Garzoni'd treatise was known also to Giovanni Battista Della Porta.,
An understanding of the relationship between electricity and magnetism began in 1819 with work by Hans Christian Ørsted, a professor at the University of Copenhagen, who discovered, by the accidental twitching of a compass needle near a wire, that an electrical current could create a magnetic field This landmark experiment is known as Ørsted's Experiment., Magnetism, at its root, arises from 3 sources: 1. Electric current, 2. Spin magnetic moments of elementary particles, 3. Changing electric field ; academia .edu/8263845/Magnetism_as_analogical_explanans_and_explanandum_in_the_seventeenth_century : Magnets and magnetism were used in the 17th century to explain a broad range of phenomena by analogy, from the rotation of the earth around its own axis and planetary attraction to the fecundation of the ovum without apparent direct contact with *****. ... magnetism was transformed, over the course of the 17th century, from a manifestation of life force and sympathetic attraction or a multiplication of species, to specific vortices or vibrations in mechanist theories, and itself something that could be used to explain other phenomena in a mechanist manner. In other words, how the phenomenon of magnetism was constituted through the analogies it was made a part of, both as explanans and as explanandum. (6th International Conference of European Society for the History of Science).; 2025.05.03/jstor .org/stable/jj.8501175 : "Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century did not affect the several branches of natural philosophy equally. Some sciences, like astronomy, mechanics and geometrical optics, already far advanced in antiquity, were then transformed into prototypes of modern, quantitative, instrumentalist physics. Other sciences, like chemistry, exchanged one set of unproductive concepts for another. Still others, like pneumatics and electricity, were created or recreated in the Scientific Revolution.¹ Some of these new sciences managed to join the first group, the transformed ‘mixed mathematics,’ by the end of the eighteenth century. Electricity led the way.", "We shall later examine the work of some 210 electricians active between 1600 and 1790. They make up two-thirds of all those then writing on electricity whose publications are noticed in the catalogs of the world’s great collections.¹ They include everyone who made significant contributions to the understanding of electrical phenomena."..."These early electricians may be divided into five groups according to their chief means of support: members of religious orders; paid academicians; professors; public lecturers; and ‘others,’ primarily artisans, practicers of professions (doctors, lawyers, ministers), and the independently wealthy.", "Although the ancients knew amber’s peculiar ability to draw light objects, and medieval philosophers had occasionally exercised their speculative powers upon it, the ‘amber effect’ did not become the basis of an independent branch of knowledge until the seventeenth century.¹ This improvement followed the discoveries that many substances besides amber could be made to exhibit the effect, and that certain characteristics seemed to distinguish it sharply from other processes previously lumped together as ‘attractions.’ In a word, the amber effect became ‘electricity,’ and those substances which displayed it, ‘electrics.’ We owe this term, derived from the Greek word for amber", "Digby took up electricity, along with everything else, in a peripatetic, animistic, corpuscularian hodge-podge written in Paris, where he enjoyed the enforced leisure of a Royalist refugee. In contrast to Gilbert, Digby took amber as the prototypical electric; he deduced that electrical effluvia have an unctuous, viscid, non-watery", Chapter IV Immaterialists: "Three seventeenth-century physicists, Madeira, Maignan and Guericke, employed principles other than material effluvia to explain the amber effect.¹ They formed no school and had no disciples. They are nonetheless individually interesting both for their work and as exceptions to the rule that the facts of electricity forced natural philosophers, whether radical or conservative, corpuscularian or peripatetic, to regard the amber effect as mechanical.", "Descartes came to speak of electricity toward the end of the fourth part of his Principia philosophiae, following his brilliantly imaginative discourse on the magnet. He apologized for opening the subject, for he had wished to limit himself to prominent natural phenomena; electricity, although common to several substances, seemed too parochial to invite attention on its own account. Moreover, the empirical evidence did not satisfy him; before he could know certainly how electrics work, he would have to try many tiresome experiments. Nonetheless he felt obliged to offer an explanation. Just before discussing the magnet he had revealed the nature", "Despite the discoveries of Gray and Dufay there was little general interest in electricity in 1740. Five years later nothing was more fashionable. ‘Persons of quality’ traveled about to see the electricity of famous professors; the Berlin Academy, in royal session, chose electrical experiments to entertain its guests; a Mr. Smith offered ‘all lovers and judges of experimental philosophy’ at Bath the sight of his ‘electrical phenomenon’ from ten in the morning to eight at night; at a certain inn in Amsterdam a lecturer stood ready six hours a day, five days a week.", "During the ‘interregnum’ that, according to Wheler, stretched from 1737, when he last attended to electricity, until ‘the Germans took up the Sphere in Hauksbee’s Method,’¹ the Reverend J. T. Desaguliers generated most of England’s electrical power.", PART FOUR The Age of Franklin:"The apparatus required—an electrical machine, a wire and a glass vessel containing water—was everyday equipment for the electrician. His constant manipulation of these elements might have created condensers wholesale once the spinning globe came into common use. But the theories received in 1745 would suggest the wrong arrangement to anyone intent upon constructing what the condenser proved to be, an instrument for concentrating and strengthening the force of electricity. Its invention, made independently in Germany and Holland, was a...", "January 1746, when Benjamin Franklin attained the age of forty and the leisure toward which he had long been working, he was busily engaged in advancing the study of natural philosophy in America. Already in 1743 he had joined in an effort to establish a society dedicated to ‘promoting useful knowledge among the British Plantations in America.’ The society at first grew briskly, but as the novelty wore off the ‘very idle Gentlemen’ who were its members found they preferred ‘the Club, Chess and Coffee House’ to the ‘Curious amusements of natural observations.’ By the fall of 1745 Franklin...", "response of Europe’s electricians to Franklin’s subversive system provides the historian with instructive material. In England, where Franklin’s letters to Collinson circulated before their publication in 1751, the American system was either ignored, as by Wilson and his group, or minimized, as by Watson, who thought it similar to his own. In France and Italy the reverse occurred; Franklin’s innovations were unduly, often unfairly, emphasized to improve their utility in academic squabbles.
On January 21, 1747/8, Watson read to the Royal Society from Franklin’s first letter on electricity. He emphasized the analogy between tube and pump and the idea...", "leading English Franklinist of the 1750s was a London schoolmaster, John Canton, a native of Stroud in Gloucestershire.", "Through Miles, whose pulpit was in Surrey, Canton obtained a situation more suitable than weaving. He was articled to a London schoolmaster, whose business he acquired in 1745.", PART FIVE Quantification : "1750 Jesuit missionaries in Peking received an electrical machine from a well-wisher in St. Petersburg. Richmann made them a present of his papers. These opportunities were not lost on Joseph Amiot, S. J., who knew all the sciences of Europe and most of the languages of Asia. He and his confrères began to amuse themselves with electricity; and in 1755 they were able to send the Petersburg Academy an account of experiments both new and important.¹", Chapter XVIII Two Fluids or One?
(pp. 431-448) : "Pursuing this commonplace,¹ which began to intrigue him in November, 1758, Robert Symmer, an ‘upstart,’ as he put it, in electricity, was led to ‘differ from all who had ever wrote upon the subject.’", Chapter XIX Quantifiable Concepts
(pp. 449-489) : "successful quantification of physical theory presupposes the existence of appropriate concepts expressible mathematically and amenable to ‘transaction,’¹ to test and refinement by measurement. The heart of the process lies in the selection of the concepts; and this, as the painful emergence of the notion of localized charge (Q) abundantly illustrates, may not be easy. Space and energy forbid our following the development of other central ideas of electrostatics, such as capacity (C) and potential (V), in the detail lavished on Q. But truth and harmony require an explicit recognition of the difficulties of selection and transdiction in their cases", "The work of Volta, Cavendish and Coulomb brought electrostatics to the point that, within a few years, it could suffer its definitive quantification at the hands of the mathematical physicists of the Ecole Polytechnique. The step permanently removed higher electrical theories from the reach of the Gilberts, Franklins and Voltas who had prepared it. It did not, however, resolve all or perhaps even the chief qualitative difficulties that had worried the electricians of the Ancien Régime. The question of the number of electrical fluids remained unanswerable; proto-field theories continued their shadowy existence, in disagreement with one another and with many"; 2025.05.10/quora .com/Is-electromagnetism-part-of-classical-mechanics : (1 upvote: Electromagnetism is the first step toward a unification of the so called natural forces or interactions. In about 1884 ,Maxwell unified the electric force(now electric field E),as was discovered by Faraday(Fe= Kq2 q1/R^2), where K is constant,q1 and q2 ,interacting charges,with the magnetic force(now magnetic field B.Magnetic force given by Fm=C mM/R^2 .So Maxwell unified these two fields into one unified field called the electromagnetic field as a wave like field its components aer E and B perpendicular to each other. The energy is continous(not quantized),at that time with the classical mechanics and Lorence transformations,it was thought the theory of physics is completed,it can explain any natural phenomenon.
But faced the new discoveries in 1900,quantization of energy(Black body radiations) and others such spectra quantization of atoms,and the discovery of a constant represent the boundary between classical physics and quantum physics,it is plank constan h=6.63X10^-34 h=0 we are in th realm of the classical physics, i.e. Classical physics is a limit to quantum physics as h approaches zer0.), 6 upvotes:"case of electromagnetism, it holds at even smaller scales - by using quantum mechanics to quantize an atom, considering the electromagnetic interactions to be described by classical electromagnetism still provides very accurate predictions!
The whole point is… classical physics is still useful, even though we know that at certain scales it loses its accuracy. The scale where it works well is enormous, so why throw classical physics out, when it’s much simpler than quantum physics, and still can make extremely accurate predictions?", "movement of EM waves related to classical mechanics or to quantum mechanics?
It is taught in the framework of classical mechanics.
There’s a branch of quantum mechanics called quantum optics, where they deal with EM waves at very low intensity, where you can do experiments with only a handful of photons.
Quantum mechanics “quantizes” the wave, that is, deals with it as particles. I guess you know that quantum mechanics brought about the realization that everything can be described as waves or as particles. Quantum optics deals with EM waves as particles (photons). There are things there which are hard to visualize, like how a single photon can be polarized, or have orbital angular momentum - but they do."
Electromagnetism-note:a

Optics-note:v
2025.05.02/research.colonialwilliamsburg .org/Foundation/journal/Autumn06/optics.cfm : "Toward the end of the seventeenth century, a Jesuit missionary in China delighted Emperor Cang Hi with what seemed like a toy but proved to be an astonishing scientific instrument. Carved from wood, the object was a semicylinder that had a convex glass in it. When the cylinder was aimed in just the right way, the lens projected images onto the wood. About 100 years later, in a 1785 letter to Thomas Jefferson, Reverend James Madison, president of the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, wrote: "The Discovery of the Abbe Rochon in optics affords altogether a new field for speculation in that science. It is an Effect wch. I believe no optician before conceived could be produced by one Lens."
From an emperor in Asia to a Virginia academic, the curious men of the Enlightenment wondered about everything they saw", "everything they saw embraced the act of seeing itself and the means by which sight operated: light. If they could comprehend light and sight, scientists reasoned they would be able to look deep within the world around them—and far beyond it.", "magic lantern projected images of delight and enlightenment for well-to-do amateurs", "1700s were a pivotal point in the timeline of inquiry. Perhaps the greatest unraveler of optical questions was Isaac Newton, who put the "light" in Enlightenment. He scored a breakthrough when he passed light through a prism to show that it was made of colors. In 1704, Newton published Opticks: Or, A Treatise of the Reflexions, Refractions, Inflexions and Colours of Light, the product of years of experiments on everything from mirrors to soap bubbles. Alexander Pope saluted the scientist with this couplet:
Nature and Nature's laws 
lay hid in night: 
God said, "Let Newton be!" 
And all was light. Many others, professional and amateur, explored light.", "Leonhard Euler, a one-eyed, Swiss-born scientist who lived in Russia, corrected one of Newton's theories. Similarly, a British medical student named Thomas Young showed that light seemed to made of waves.", "Previously, navigators employed unsatisfactory instruments to make their way out to sea and back again. Astrolabes, quadrants, cross-staffs, and back-staffs were serviceable, but cumbersome and iffy when it came to accuracy. With mirrors and telescopes, the sextants and octants—the names depended on whether they encompassed a sixth- or eighth-part of a circle—joined with the perfection of longitude clocks to take ships on accurate voyages around the world.", "appeal of optics reached into the homes of everyday, albeit wealthy citizens. Wendy Bellion, assistant professor in the department of art history at Rutgers University, says the interest was "part of the broader Enlightenment. It often had a public aspect to it for the amusement of the middling class." In 1774 in the Pennsylvania Gazette, for example, a shopkeeper named Andrew Porter catalogued "a most curious, elegant and best finished portable optical apparatus, consisting"... [Center between the authority (individual scientist) & aristocrats (wealthy citizens) with being "everyday" also exercising basic common sense from Pendlebury's definition with their ability to epistemically grasp by affording tools to replicate kinda.], "Dutch optician, is credited with inventing the twin-lens microscope in 1595. Robert Hooke, an Englishman, and Christaan Huygens of Holland came up with the triple-lens microscope with two eyepieces in the seventeenth century. Van Leeuwenhoek from Delft, who lived into the first quarter of the eighteenth century, designed a microscope with a magnification power of 300.
Microscopes were part of an educated man's study in the 1700s. John Adams said that "the Telescope has settled the Regions of Heaven, and the Microscope has brought up to View innumerable millions of Animals that Escape the observation of our naked sight." But James Logan, a Philadelphia merchant and amateur scientist, said that while microscopes allowed humans to see invisible worlds, there were probably still tinier things that would never be viewed, given the limits of man's senses.
Here were discoveries and inventions in optics beyond the realm of hard science. "There were a number of optical toys to produce optical illusions," said Professor Bellion, who had a fellowship at the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture in Williamsburg. "There were new kinds of optical techniques, and older forms were popular as well, such as the camera obscura, a predecessor to the modern photographic camera. There was also the Claude glass, a concave mirror you held up to see what was behind you."
Magic lanterns were among the toys. References as early as 1420 talk about a device that projected an image onto a wall or screen by throwing light through an illustrated slide. As the centuries unfolded, scientists like Huygens learned to focus and enlarge the images. On August 19, 1666, Samuel Pepys, who had an interest in "opticke enquiries," recorded in his diary that he saw at a friend's house "a lanthorne with pictures in glasse, to make strange things appear on a wall, very pretty."
Magic lanterns were often used to frighten audiences, with images of the devil, for example, and "various Apparitions and Disappearances," as a 1668 description put it. In the eighteenth century, such demonstrations became known in some places as "Phantasmagoria" and treated the audience to such sights as ghostly apparitions, eery monstrosities, and "the bleeding nun." Etienne Gaspard Robertson put his magic lantern—which he called a Fantascope—on wheels so that he could shift the size of the image by moving the projector to and fro.
Travelogues were popular as well, such as one presented in Philadelphia in 1749. An advertisement in the Pennsylvania Gazette said that audiences", "camera obscura was put to uses ranging from painting to entertainment. It was based on a simple principle known for centuries: When light shines through a small aperture into a dark room, it casts an upside-down image of what's outside on the interior wall opposite the opening. In Latin, camera obscura means "dark chamber." Ancient Chinese philosophers and Aristotle noted the phenomenon, and scientists toyed with it for centuries. But when lenses were placed over the apertures in the sixteenth century, the image could be enlarged and focused, making it particularly useful for drawing. Giambattista della Porta, an Italian playwright and amateur scientist, said in a 1558 book that by using a camera obscura", "1805 letter to Jefferson indicates that he owned at least two. William Tatham, a friend in London, ordered a new one for the president "to be made as elegantly plain as possible, by the best workmen with spare glasses of several focuses, Diagonal Head, &c, compleat." A camera obscura could be as small as a tabletop device or as large as a living room.", "camera obscura went along with Lewis and Clark to help them record plants and animals, and Etienne de Silhouette used one for the portraits that carry his name. Modern painter David Hockney says, to the consternation of some art critics, that the Old Masters turned to the camera obscura and lenses to help them take images from the real world and trace them to re-create perfect perspectives. Artists in the eighteenth century had another tool to achieve that aim, thanks to Britain's Brook Taylor.", ""artist and mathematician who developed the Taylor Series, which is the foundation for virtually all analysis in physics even today." He said Taylor's perspective insight was a "key advance" in the "full understanding of perspective."
The relative miniaturization of the camera obscura was another advance in the eighteenth century, Tyler said: "It was used by Canaletto and Sir Joshua Reynolds, founding president of the Royal Academy in London. Quite how they used their devices in composing their works remains obscure."
The idea of using lenses to correct vision had been around at least since the Greeks and Romans used magnifiers to improve their sight. Roger Bacon, in the thirteenth century, recommended "crystal or glass or other transparent substance" with a convex curve as a means of correcting weak eyes.", "Johannes Kepler was the first to explain how eyeglasses could correct poor vision, thanks to his studies of the cornea and retina.
By the eighteenth century, glasses were an everyday item. Many of the Founding Fathers wore them. A portrait of Patrick Henry shows specs pushed atop his head. After the Revolution, George Washington used his reading glasses to make the poignant point that he had grown old and nearly blind in the service of his country. Jefferson owned a pair of sunglasses, which were the circa-1750 creation of Londoner James Ayscough, who said that clear light was damaging to the eye. It was also during the 1700s that spectacles acquired ear pieces to hold them in place, thanks again to Ayscough.
And someone came up with bifocals. Some credit Benjamin Franklin, but others boost Samuel Pierce as the inventor. Franklin, who called the innovation his "double spectacle," got the idea after becoming annoyed with having to shift between glasses for reading and ones for viewing distant objects. He instructed his optician to combine the lenses into one set of glasses and said, "I have only to move my eyes up or down, as I want to see distinctly far or near, the proper glasses being always ready."
As the eighteenth century closed, Ludwig von Beethoven composed a duet for viola and cello that he and a good friend, Nikolaus Zmeskall, could perform. Aware of Zmeskall's poor vision and his own weakening eyesight, Beethoven titled the work "Duet with Two Eye-Glasses Obbligato,"", "scientific advances and just plain fun of optics in the eighteenth century were summed up by David Rittenhouse, the Pennsylvania polymath, who called light "this wonderful substance, ...which animates all nature in the eyes of man, and perhaps, above all things, disposes him to acknowledge the Creator's bounty."", "avid curiosity about optics among amateur scientists in the eighteenth century can be seen in the pages of publications like London’s Gentleman’s Magazine. In 1748, it posed “Three Paradoxes in Optics” to its readers:
I. There is an object, which, when view’d by the Microscope, is not at all magnify’d, tho’ you use a Lens of the greatest magnifying power.
II. There is an object, which, when view’d by the Microscope, shall appear less than it does to the naked eye, let the Lens, by which you view it, be of ever so great a magnifying power.
III. There is a 3rd object to be viewed by the Microscope, some parts of which shall appear magnify’d, as other objects, and some other of its parts shall not appear magnify’d at all; and yet the whole object is seen thro’ the microscope at one view.
What’s the answer to this head scratcher? At the end of 1748, “J.C.X.” offered his solution:
Answer to Paradox I. The fine edge of a knife (or fine blade of steel) when truly set, cannot be magnified by the best Lens, by reason of the acuteness of the angle at the edge.
Answer to Paradox II. The same knife, or fine blade sharp-pointed, when held horizontally be- fore the glass, shall appear less than when in a perpendicular position.
Answer to Paradox III. As above, the fine edge cannot be magnified, which is one part of the object; so if the same blade be held oblique to the Lens, the superficial part of the blade will be magnified, when the other part (the edge) is not, yet the whole seen thro’ the Lens at one view."
Optics-note:a

Classical physics-note:v
2025.03.23/researchgate .net/profile/John-Thompson-13/publication/266476201_The_%27Principia%27_and_Contemporary_Mechanics_Chaotic_Dynamics_and_the_New_Unpredictability/links/57eebe8008ae280dd0ad6a59/The-Principia-and-Contemporary-Mechanics-Chaotic-Dynamics-and-the-New-Unpredictability.pdf : p.11: Dynamical systems theory: Bohr's quantum mechanics & not Einstein's relativity took Newton's determinism out of basic physics's heart.; 2025.04.01/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Applied_mechanics : "Applied Mechanics can be split into classical mechanics; the study of the mechanics of macroscopic solids, and fluid mechanics; the study of the mechanics of macroscopic fluids.[4] Each branch of applied mechanics contains subcategories formed through their own subsections as well.[4] Classical mechanics, divided into statics and dynamics, are even further subdivided, with statics' studies split into rigid bodies and rigid structures, and dynamics' studies split into kinematics and kinetics.[4] Like classical mechanics, fluid mechanics is also divided into two sections: statics and dynamics."; 2025.04.01/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Classical_mechanics : "Classical mechanics was traditionally divided into three main branches. Statics is the branch of classical mechanics that is concerned with the analysis of force and torque acting on a physical system that does not experience an acceleration, but rather is in equilibrium with its environment.[3] Kinematics describes the motion of points, bodies (objects), and systems of bodies (groups of objects) without considering the forces that cause them to move.[4][5][3] Kinematics, as a field of study, is often referred to as the "geometry of motion" and is occasionally seen as a branch of mathematics.[6][7][8] Dynamics goes beyond merely describing objects' behavior and also considers the forces which explain it. Some authors (for example, Taylor (2005)[9] and Greenwood (1997)[10]) include special relativity within classical dynamics. Forces vs. energy", division can be made by region of application: Celestial mechanics, "Continuum mechanics, for materials modelled as a continuum, e.g., solids and fluids (i.e., liquids and gases).", Relativistic mechanics. Statistical mechanics., Newtonian mechanics Lagrangian mechanics Hamiltonian mechanics, ; 2024: Geometrical optics is most boring according to redditors & forum-answers. Protocoling difference between particle masses most boring according to students.; 2025.04.04/physicsforums .com/threads/should-i-become-a-classical-physicist.126640/ : "Oct 4, 2006 #6 djtchong Second year is the worst...they try and "weed out the weak" so as to make sure the most competent students make it to grad school...lol  and you should learn how to program it helps.", Oct 4, 2006 #8 mr_coffee : "300+ and the professor could careless about you, he isn't going to slow down even if the class average is that low. The point of the course is to weed out the non-engineers."; 2025.04.04/old.reddit .com/r/Physics/comments/b54enm/why_is_classical_physics_seen_as_so_unsexy/ : Scientific journalism gives quantum more attention than classical. There's a "worrying" trend that undergrads take quantum more & classical physics less seriously. 2025.04.04/filterdom .com/classical-physicist-an-overview/ : "We believed that each masters-level or PhD physicist ought to be acquainted with the fundamental concepts of all of the important branches of classical physics and ought to have some experience applying them to real world phenomena. Quantum physicists have a tendency to regard the findings less significant.", "Textbooks have a great deal of stuff in them that is much too much establishment-driven.", "classical analogies of these phenomena turn out to be very easy."; 2025.04.13/:"Until the 17th century, mechanics, physics, chemistry, earth sciences, astronomy, and even physiology were part of a "package of knowledge" called "natural philosophy" and combining positive information about natural phenomena and ingenious guesses (concepts of space, time, movement, the idea of natural law, infinity of the world, continuum of space, discrete structure of matter) with speculative fantasies and erroneous conclusions about the causes of these phenomena.
The history of physics as an independent science begins in the 17th century with the experiments of Galileo and his students. Newton found the theoretical foundation of classical physics at the end of the 17th century. The combination of rapid technological development and its theoretical understanding in the 18th-19th centuries led to the identification of fundamental physical concepts (mass, energy, momentum, atoms, etc.) and the discovery of the fundamental laws of their interrelation, well tested in experiments.
At the beginning of the 20th century, the limitations of the scope of application of classical physics were discovered in several areas at once."; 2025.04.26/arxiv .org/pdf/2504.02822 : p.1:"history of science, we have witnessed the rise and fall of theories driven by experimental validation or falsification: many theories may co-exist when exper- imental data is lacking, but the space of surviving theories becomes more constrained with more experimental data becoming available. We show the same story is true for AI scientists. With increasingly more systems provided in training data, AI scientists tend to converge in the theories they learned, although sometimes they form distinct groups corresponding to different theories. To mechanistically interpret what theories AI scientists learn and quantify their agreement, we propose MASS, Hamiltonian-Lagrangian neural networks as AI Scientists, trained on standard problems in physics, aggregating training results across many seeds simulating the different configurations of AI scientists. Our key findings include: 1) when trained on textbook problems in classical mechanics, AI scientists prefers either a complete Hamiltonian or Lagrangian descrip- tion; 2) when extended to non-standard physical problems, the Lagrangian description generalizes, suggesting that Lagrangian dynamics remain as the singular accurate fam- ily of descriptions in a rich theory space.", Backpropa-nicus: Lvl 1, Neu-ton: Lvl 2, AI-nation: Lvl 3, "evolution of AI scientists. Different AI sci- entists learning from data within the same physical system, even in the simple pendulum, arrives at different results. The- ories that fail to support the current data are marked wrong. Surviving AI scientists are exposed to more complex systems, such as the double pendulum. AI scientists modify their the- ories to model the new data."; 2025.04.27/old.reddit .com/r/PhysicsGRE/comments/3gmc7e/the_physics_gre_compendium_practice_tests_and : Edit (August 4, 2022): "So you want to go to grad school? ... and you want to do physics. Well, a big part of the grad school admissions process involves taking the Physics GRE. The Physics GRE is a standardized test offered by the ETS three times a year, and is basically like the SAT but for grad school.", "exam tests knowledge of all levels of undergraduate physics, with specific fractions of the test geared towards specific subject matters:
CLASSICAL MECHANICS — 20% ELECTROMAGNETISM — 18% OPTICS AND WAVE PHENOMENA — 9% THERMODYNAMICS AND STATISTICAL MECHANICS — 10% QUANTUM MECHANICS — 12% ATOMIC PHYSICS — 10% SPECIAL RELATIVITY — 6% LABORATORY METHODS — 6% SPECIALIZED TOPICS — 9%; 2025.04.27/philsci-archive.pitt .edu/606/1/LCP2.doc : p.1: "The first half is an historical overview of the formation of the language of classical physics (LCP), beginning with Aristotle's Categories and the novel idea of the quantity of a quality introduced by medieval Aristotelians. Descartes and Newton attempted to put the new mechanics on an ontological foundation of atomism.  Euler was the pivotal figure in basing mechanics on a macroscopic concept of matter. The second scientific revolution, led by Laplace, took mechanics as foundational and attempted to fit the Baconian sciences into a framework of atomistic mechanism. This protracted effort had the unintended effect of supplying an informal unification of physics in a mixture of ordinary language and mechanistic terms. The second half treats LCP as a linguistic parasite that can attach itself to any language and effect mutations in the host without changing its essential form. This puts LCP in the context of a language of discourse and suggests that philosophers should  concentrate more on the dialog between experimenters and theoreticians and less on analyses of theories. This orientation supplies a basis for treating objectivity.", "The language of classical physics is a linguistic parasite. It evolved from an Indo-European core but can now attach itself to Japanese, Arabic, or any other language while preserving its basic structure and inducing mutations in its successive hosts. It is a language of discourse, particularly the discourse between experimenters and theoreticians."; 2025.04.27/physicsbook.gatech .edu/Classical_Physics : Simple: Classical Mechanics, Middling: Thermodynamics, Difficult: probably electromagnetism., "As a physics major, this distinguish is important in the approach to solving problem for large bodies that are moving slower than the speed of light versus subatomic particles moving at the speed of light.
Classical physics theories are still the basis for theories in modern physics, for example in classical physics any frame moves at a constant velocity if there is no external force or the object is at rest, in modern physics (special relativity) an inertial frame is a frame of reference when a free object experiences zero net force and moves at constant velocity relative to the observer.
Industrial application of classical physics can be seen in electric motors, elevators, moving floors to escalators.", "Sir Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, and James Maxwell"; 2025.04.28-29/sites.astro.caltech .edu/~golwala/ph106ab/ph106ab_notes.pdf : p.107: "difficult to overstate the importance of symmetry transformations and Noether’s theo- rem to the development of classical mechanics, classical field theory, quantum field theory, and much of the physics of the twentieth century. New theories, especially in quantum field theory, are frequently based on assumptions about what symmetry transformations nature should obey. Requirements of invariance under global symmetry transformations of the kind described here are frequently a starting point for new Lagrangians and provide conserved quantities (“charges”)."; 2025.04.30/lightcolourvision .org/dictionary/definition/classical-physics : Newtonian mechanics – Isaac Newton, 17th century, Thermodynamics – Carnot, Joule & Kelvin, 19th century, Maxwell's electromagnetism, 19th century.; 2025.04.30/amazon .com/Newtonian-Electrodynamics-Neal-Graneau/dp/9810226810 : "Newtonian electrodynamics of Coulomb, Ampere, Neumann, and Kirchhoff, which was current from 1750 to 1900"; 2025.05.01/fs .blog/seduced-logic : "Against great odds, Émilie du Châtelet (1706–1749) taught herself mathematics and became a world authority on Newtonian mathematical physics."; 2025.05.01/philpapers .org/archive/WELDCO-2.pdf : p.1: Emilie Du Châtelet saw space, time and mathematical objects as part wise imagination like Wolff. Math as good guide of how the world really is as opposed to Christian Wolff., p.4:"crucial explanatory role"; 2025.05.02/link.springer .com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-009-4690-3_6 : "Since the beginning of the 19th century, it found an ever increasing use as an auxiliary instrument to other laboratory apparatus."; 2025.05.03/jstor .org/stable/jj.8501175 : "At the beginning of the seventeenth century ‘physics’ signified a qualitative, bookish science of natural bodies in general. It was at once wider and narrower than the subject that now has its name: wider in its coverage, which included organic and psychological as well as inorganic phenomena; and narrower in its methods, which recommended neither mathematics nor experiment. The width of coverage and the depreciation of mathematics derived from Aristotle; the indifference to experiment, as opposed to everyday experience, from the authors of peripatetic textbooks."; 2025.05.03/old.reddit .com/r/AskPhysics/comments/jwcgxv/are_physics_12_and_classical_mechanics_the_same : [deleted] 4 points 4 years ago*: Physics 1: Typically covers Newtonian Mechanics, Forces, Basic Energy principles etc. Basic differential calculus., Physics 2: Classical Electro-magnetism NOT electrodynamics. Covers basic fields, charges, static charges etc. Extension of Classic Newtonian Mechanics to EM. Needs differential+integral calculus, while co-enrollment in Multivariable/Vector Calculus.  Classical Mechanics-course = Analytical Mechanics-course: "Reformulation of Newtonian Mechanics in more mathy terms, mainly Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics. Usually you'd need to complete Multivariable/Vector Calculus, while co-enrolled in Ordinary Differential Equations.", "Classical Mechanics and Electrodynamics are the "big boy" versions of Physics 1 and 2. Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Mechanics are typically used in higher level classes as well"; 2025.05.03/old.reddit .com/r/Temple/comments/2rsct8/general_physics_vs_elementary_classical_physics/ : "i_ride_wood_boards__ 2 points 10 years ago  iirc, general is algebra-based and classical uses calculus.", jbreiner29'15, MechE major 1 point 10 years ago: "since you're mechanical engineering, you will most definitely have to take the calc based physics (elementary classical physics)."; 2025.05.03/physicsforums .com/threads/general-physics-vs-classical-physics.812654/ : May 7, 2015  #2 Chopp : "most students who take first-year physics take it because it's a requirement for medical school or the program they've signed up for an have little interest in the "beauty" of problems in classical mechanics. Some schools will even have separate first-year classes for physical science majors (ie. a calculus-based physics), and everyone else (algebra-based)."; 2025.05.04/old.reddit .com/r/gatech/comments/17lonri/does_modernclassical_physics_still_exist/ : mattyb827 44 points 1 year ago  Classical and Modern were teaching styles not concepts. Classical was traditional pen and paper. Modern used python and simulations I believe. , KirbybirbPhys - 2026 21 points 1 year ago* : "Rather, modern and classical are two different ways intro physics 1 and 2 are taught. Modern has coded labs and is generally less "physicsy", so people like it because it's considered easier than classical, which is more like a normal class in Newtonian mechanics.
If you're a physics major or completing a physics minor, there is a class, PHYS 2213, which, perhaps a little confusingly, is called Intro to Modern Physics, and that class gives a brief overview of the physics from the past century or so.", Unlucky_Garlic2409 4 points 1 year ago  I'm a GTA for PHYS 2211 currently. Apparently, a vast majority of students wanted to take "modern" physics over "classical" in previous semesters. So, they dropped the less popular option. Honestly, the difference between the 2 is not drastic., MattPerry1216CmpE - 2025 5 points 1 year ago 
The classic vs modern difference is only present in the labs (at least currently), classical uses things like carts and force sensors, and modern uses programming models. The difference is not the approach to the concepts rather the approach to the labs., KirbybirbPhys - 2026 4 points 1 year ago  The honors physics courses are under a different numbering scheme than normal intro 1 & intro 2; they're not modern, at least not as far as Scherbakov teaches Honors 2 and whoever teaches Honors 1. I'm actually in Honors 2 with Scherbakov right now and it's closer to classical than modern, to the extent that people who wanted to take classical intro 2 were directed to take honors 2 instead., Pizzachomper874 1 point 1 year ago  ... He taught Quantum 1 when I was there (and I think he did the full class for class-mech too one year).; 2025.05.04/imperial.ac .uk/media/imperial-college/research-centres-and-groups/theoretical-physics/msc/ACP.pdf : p.2: "course assumes Mechanics, Relativity and Electromagnetism as background knowledge. Be- ing a theoretical course, it also makes heavy use of most aspects of the compulsory mathematics courses. Mathematical Methods is also useful, but it is not a formal prerequisite, and all necessary concepts are introduced as part of this course, although in a less general way.", p.4: 4 Hamiltonian Mechanics 41 4.1 Hamilton’s Equations 41 4.2 Poisson Brackets  44 4.3 Symmetries and Conservation Laws  45 4.4 Canonical Transformations 46 5 Electromagnetic Potentials 49 5.1 Vector Potential 49 5.2 GaugeInvariance  51 5.3 Particle in an electromagnetic Field  52 5.4 Retarded Potentials  53 5.5 Fields of a Moving Charge  58 6 Electrodynamics and Relativity 61 6.1 Four-Vectors 61 6.2 Relativistic Electrodynamics; 2025.05.04/arion.aut.ac .nz/arionmain/courseinfo/Information/Qualifications/Details/PaperDetails.aspx?actiontype=1&id=39084 : PHYS500 Lvl 5: "general, calculus-based classical physics course. The topics covered are: particle kinematics, Newtonian dynamics, work and energy, gravitation, collisions and momentum, torque and angular momentum, rigid-body statics and dynamics, harmonic oscillations, mechanical waves, sound waves, thermal processes, laws of thermodynamics, entropy." (Lagrangian, Newtonian physics); 2025.05.04/ : p.1: "Demonstrate an understanding of the principles of classical mechanics and thermodynamics", - Particle dynamics, -Newtonian dynamics
- Work and energy
- Gravitation
- Collisions and momentum
- Torque and angular momentum - Rigid-body statics and dynamics - Thermal processes
- Laws of thermodynamics, - Entropy; 2025.05.04/mit .edu/course/22/22.09/ClassHandouts/Charged%20Particle%20Accel/CHAP02.PDF : "charged particles to electromagnetic forces is the basis of particle optics and accelerator theory. The goal is to find the time-dependent position and velocity of particles, given specified electric and magnetic fields.", "Newtonian laws, treated in the first sections, apply at low particle energy. At high energy, particle trajectories must be described by relativistic equations. Although Newton's laws and their implications can be understood intuitively, the laws of relativity cannot since they apply to regimes beyond ordinary experience. Nonetheless, they must be accepted to predict particle behavior in high-energy accelerators. In fact, accelerators have provided some of the most direct verifications of relativity.
This chapter reviews particle mechanics. Section 2.1 summarizes the properties of electrons and ions. Sections 2.2-2.4 are devoted to the equations of Newtonian mechanics. These are applicable to electrons from electrostatic accelerators of in the energy range below 20 kV. This range includes many useful devices such as cathode ray tubes, electron beam welders, and microwave tubes. Newtonian mechanics also describes ions in medium energy accelerators used for nuclear physics. The Newtonian equations are usually simpler to solve than relativistic formulations. Sometimes it is possible to describe transverse motions of relativistic particles using Newtonian equations with a relativistically corrected mass.", p.2: "Quantum theory is unnecessary except to describe the emission of radiation at high energy.
This book will deal only with ions and electrons. They are simple, stable particles. Their response to the fields applied in accelerators is characterized completely by two quantities: mass and charge. Nonetheless, it is possible to apply much of the material presented to other particles. For example, the motion of macroparticles with an electrostatic charge can be treated by the methods developed in Chapters 6-9. Applications include the suspension of small objects in oscillating electric quadrupole fields and the acceleration and guidance of inertial fusion targets. At the other extreme are unstable elementary particles produced by the interaction of high-energy ions or electrons with targets."; 2025.05.04/d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront .net/60740296/Atmospheric_and_Space_Flight_Dynamics._Modeling___Simulation_with_MATLABВ___SimulinkВ_Tewari_A._-_200620190929-24926-e2l1sd-libre.pdf?1569796101=&response-content-disposition=attachment%3B+filename%3DAtmospheric_and_Space_Flight_Dynamics_Mo.pdf&Expires=1746350308&Signature=e0ZjrKe8j9dGB9qnOWUY2nKVs3KNdRDBu9jba0I1Q4Svvr6ujhC-78JeNw5o5HHwkMpEewR6K~v8MqObNlG3CatPk8pq6wE8yaWVZgxXE~vvfmfpXLyyIRlsZJZU25UtMiuJHNVttD4de6StX6FwQp-9O0zBaHcqTuEJQt68O-snzuC6cbdj3iu-mtoeqmDMhDI9Nd1jA3bYg1-4ugyoNvjfCdQEqj9-ZTIWMgnhnGapD9ev4VN7w6ERzKkJhUdFK37yPE7fW1nWw45UwKcYh8yZ8u6zZDbcGVVb5JiYIwbqyEYBOJCZKHdpfVBvzkpBpYayEK0qZtSuOzVXmHZDnA__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA : Newton's three laws describe particles and forms basis of classical mechanics.; 2024.05.04/avesis.erciyes .edu .tr/publication/details/460d3810-e3c0-4ed6-bb43-c0289baaa445/oai : "Introductory classical physics courses strongly encourage students to develop a perspective that can be described as being a pragmatist; from this perspective, any given motion can be utilized to determine its future physical properties. Such an approach can be very problematic for the students who take introductory quantum physics courses since above perspective can be very destructive for the development of newer and more abstract ideas."; 2025.05.09/Encyclopedia of physics, vol_3-1_Principles of classical – S_ (Editor), Flugge – Springer, 1960 – Springer – Verlag: p.8: classical dynamics means dynamics of particles & rigid bodies, with emphasis on general theory. Essential kinematic preliminaries are included, with finite displacements, mass eine try, force systems & generalized coordinates. Newtonian dynamics describes physical phenomena excellently under what may be called "ordinary circumstances" like engineering & neither large nor small systems., Present custom "mechanics" embraces dynamics & statics. Dynamics deals with systems in motion & statics with rest. Literal meaning of "dynamics" is "force". P. G. Taut: In language- & most logical writers's view, the true sense of dynamics is a science which treats action of force regardless of maintaining relative rest, or produces acceleration of relative motion. 2 corresponding divisions of Dynamics are thus conveniently entities "Statics" & "Kinematics". Word "kinetics" did not catch on, perhaps on account of its great resemblance to "kinematics". It was used in German "Kinetik" by Grammel, Winkel & Mann.,
p.9: Smallest unit of matter are no longer believed to obey Newtonian laws, except approximately & in circumstances rarely occurring in sense matter. Classical laws falling at tangible portions of matter are , 
Errors of order (u/c)2 appear when Newtonian dynamics is applied to bodies in rapid motion. But it is not possible to assess in any simple way errors committed when classical dynamics is applied to problems on atomic scale., p.11: There was a time where even geometrists confuses math with physics. Now (1760), pure mathematicians have to look.;
2026.01.01/lab.cccb .org/en/critical-physics/ : "origins of classical physics and mechanics are to be found in the projection of a bifurcated image of nature, in other words, the claim that reality is divided into two parts: that which derives from human subjectivity and that which is natural and hence lies beyond the limits of the social fact. To use the terms employed by Whitehead, “the dream” and “the conjecture,” since that which exists beyond the limits of the human person can never be fully known, but only supposed. Physics offers itself as a means by which we can explain this separated nature of the human subject. More specifically, classical physics responds, among other things, to three main philosophical developments.";
2026.02.01/opensciences .org/files/pdfs/Manifesto-for-a-Post-Materialist-Science.pdf : Biased towards the too scientific mathematized rational worldview: Ironically, this paper commits to  a worldview, which in extreme, would close itself off away from materialism. I question, if people can really leave dogmas in general meanwhile making statements that aren't 100% certain. Depending on what dogma means, one of them being commitment itself, it's hard to impossible to escape it meanwhile making statements in this world. We need to strive for a productive, truth-orientated dogma for this goral. Living along with dogma in moderation. p.1: "modern scientific worldview is predominantly predicated on assumptions that are closely associated with classical physics. Materialism—the idea that matter is the only reality—is one of these assumptions. A related assumption is reductionism, the notion that complex things can be understood by reducing them to the interactions of their parts, or to simpler or more fundamental things such as tiny material particles.
2. During the 19th century, these assumptions narrowed, turned into dogmas, and coalesced into an ideological belief system that came to be known as “scientific materialism.” This belief system implies that the mind is nothing but the physical activity of the brain, and that our thoughts cannot have any effect upon our brains and bodies, our actions, and the physical world.
3. The ideology of scientific materialism became dominant in academia during the 20th century. So dominant that a majority of scientists started to believe that it was based on established empirical evidence, and represented the only rational view of the world.
4. Scientific methods based upon materialistic philosophy have been highly successful in not only increasing our understanding of nature but also in bringing greater control and freedom through advances in technology." (It isn't the methods it-selves but the outcome of understanding nature. Scientific methods caused more freedom like Denmark and more authoritarianism like North Korea and Soviet Union in 1946-1947 from V-Dem due technology.)
"5. However, the nearly absolute dominance of materialism in the academic world has seriously constricted the sciences and hampered the development of the scientific study of mind and spirituality. Faith in this ideology, as an exclusive explanatory framework for reality, has compelled scientists to neglect the subjective dimension of human experience. This has led to a severely distorted and impoverished understanding of ourselves and our place in nature.
6. Science is first and foremost a non-dogmatic, open-minded method of acquiring knowledge about nature through the observation, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena. Its methodology is not synonymous with materialism and should not be committed to any particular beliefs, dogmas, or ideologies.
7. At the end of the nineteenth century, physicists discovered empirical phenomena that could not be explained by classical physics. This during the 1920s and early 1930s,
by showing that atoms and subatomic particles are not really solid objects—they do not exist with certainty at definite spatial locations and
   led to the development,
 of a revolutionary new branch of physics called quantum mechanics (QM). QM has
 questioned the material foundations of the world" (2026.01.02/richardwiseman .com/resources/MediumBJP.pdf contradicts the certainty of mediums.); 2026.02.01/iopscience.iop .org/book/edit/978-0-7503-2678-0/chapter/bk978-0-7503-2678-0ch1 : "Modern Physics A critical approach": "classical physics includes all the theories formulated after the seventeenth and before the twentieth century, characterized by the implementation of the scientific method proposed by Galileo Galilei [1]. From that moment, nature was investigated by scientists under a completely new perspective. The key feature of classical physics is undoubtedly the determinism which characterizes all its fields, from celestial mechanics to electrodynamics. According to Pierre Simon Laplace, ‘an intelligence knowing all the forces acting in nature at a given instant, as well as the momentary positions of all things in the Universe, would be able to comprehend in one single formula the motions of the largest bodies as well as the lightest atoms in the world … nothing would be uncertain, the future as well as the past would be present to its eyes’ [2].  The birth of quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity in the twentieth century undermined that vision of the Universe and created the crisis of classical physics, highlighting the need to adopt a totally different point of view (see chapters 3, 7 and 8). However, deep knowledge of the concepts of classical physics cannot be avoided if one is to understand modern physics. In fact, a physicist’s mindset is shaped at the beginning when it approaches classic physics.",
"handle classical mechanics it is possible to acquire an universal method which turns out to be useful in every field of physics (and not only in physics)";
2026.02.01/link.springer .com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-2369-6_4 : "introducing a new non-classical physics Einstein and Bohr indirectly specified the limits of classical physics. Einstein’s special relativity put constraints on all the laws of physics, giving these laws a functional unification. Bohr effectively resolved the contradictions physicists were encountering through semantic guidelines limiting the use of classical terms in quantum contexts.";
2026.02.01/ : The Interpretation of Classical Physics: p.115: "Classical physics is not a theory. It relies on ‘object’ as a presupposition, but the systems considered represent idiontology, rather than ontology.",
p.116: "When we view classical physics as a conceptual system, then its conceptual core is a streamlined version of the core of ordinary language. We take as the core of ordi- nary language a subject/object distinction and a basic conceptualization of reality as interrelated spatio-temporal objects with properties. Classical physics extends the object side of the basic dichotomy and implicitly replaces the subject by a detached observer who can view reality without changing it. To understand the conceptual framework for experimental reports it is imperative to regard classical physics as an extension of an ordinary language framework.";
2026.03.22/clrn .org/what-is-classical-physics/ : "indispensable tool for numerous engineering and  scientific disciplines. Its predictive power within its defined domain is remarkably accurate and continues to be foundational for technological innovation." (Relation between classical physics, peak tech-innovation despite decline in mid-18th century of technological innovation according to Charles Murray's human accomplishment pdf and 18th century using classical physics and breaking innovations.), "Classical physics postulates a deterministic universe, but the inherent complexities of real-world systems often render precise predictions practically impossible due to factors like sensitive dependence on initial conditions (chaos theory) and limitations in measurement accuracy.", "Classical physics remains a critical foundation for modern technology and  scientific understanding. While modern physics has extended our understanding of the universe to extreme scales and conditions, the principles of classical physics continue to provide accurate and reliable predictions for a vast range of phenomena encountered in everyday life and engineering applications. Its enduring relevance underscores its significance as a cornerstone of scientific and technological advancement"

Classical physics-note:a

Classical physics-author:v
scienceforums .net/profile/140669-classical-physicist/ ; 2025.04.04/dacemirror.sci-hub .ru/journal-article/c903144084654503d255b097ae9f2f04/fridkin2007.pdf?download=true : Nobel Prize Winner Prof. Vitaly Ginzburg is last Classical Physicist.; perlego .com/book/112821/the-cosmic-code-quantum-physics-as-the-language-of-nature-pdf : Einstein was last classical physicist.; 2025.04.04/ethw .org/Oral-History:David_Middleton_(2000) : "classical physicist, really sort of a statistical physicist. There’s no good word or even pair of words that accurately describe my interests. On social occasions, people sometimes ask me “What do you do?” I’ve learned just to say, “I’m a scientist of sorts—an applied physicist and mathematician.” Even then I can tell from their expression that they have no idea what I’m talking about."
Classical physics-author:a

Classical physics-search-note:v

roughly 2025-04-26: https://www.w3.org/services/html2txt?url=https://textfrom.website/https://toolsyep.com/en/webpage-to-plain-text/?u=test-english.com&noinlinerefs=on&nonums=on

https://www.w3.org/services/html2txt?url=https://textfrom.website/%s&noinlinerefs=on&nonums=on

https://www.w3.org/services/html2txt?url=https://textfrom.website/https://toolsyep.com/en/webpage-to-plain-text/?u=test-english.com&noinlinerefs=on&nonums=on

Without emails protected due textfrom.website: https://www.w3.org/services/html2txt?url=https://www.w3.org/services/html2txt?url=https://toolsyep.com/en/webpage-to-plain-text/?u=%s&noinlinerefs=on&nonums=on

(Workable with Bing: https://toolsyep.com/en/webpage-to-plain-text/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftextfrom.website%2Fhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fservices%2Fhtml2txt%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.bing.com%252Fsearch%253Fq%253DTest%26noinlinerefs%3Don%26nonums%3Don
; https://toolsyep.com/en/webpage-to-plain-text/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fservices%2Fhtml2txt%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.bing.com%252Fsearch%253Fq%253DTest%26noinlinerefs%3Don%26nonums%3Don )

https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https://www.w3.org/services/html2txt%253Furl%253Dhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Ftoolsyep.com%25252Fen%25252Fwebpage-to-plain-text%25252F%25253Fu%25253Dhttps://google.com%26noinlinerefs%3Don%26nonums%3Don Without other extensions.

2025-05-06: Classical physics-search-note:v



scienceforums .net/search/?&q=test&quick=1&type=forums_topic&nodes=8&start_after=any&updated_after=any ; 2025.04.04/scispace .com/topics/classical-physics-2omvlmtn?paper_page=50 ; 2025.04.05/search.worldcat .org/title/707943794?oclcNum=707943794 : books.google .com/books?id=8SBWAAAAYAAJ , books.google .com/books?id=vgMPAQAAMAAJ , books.google .com/books?id=5QkPAQAAMAAJ ; 2025.04.05/universityrankings .com .au/classical-physics-ranking-journals-2/ > 2025.04.05/pubs.aip .org/search-results?q=mail&allJournals=1&fl_SiteID=1&fd_ArticleTitle=%22Test%22&page=1&f_TocHeadingTitle=CLASSICAL+MECHANICS+%40%40%40+CLASSICAL+FIELDS ; 2025.04.29/physicsforums .com/insights/tag/classical-physics/?s=T; sciencegate .app/ "0" NOT "statistical physics" NOT "High Energy" NOT "Quantum" NOT "Modern Physics" NOT "Theoretical Physics" NOT "Relativity" NOT "relativistic" NOT "large scale" NOT "electromagnetic" NOT "X Rays" NOT "hamiltonian" NOT "modern science" NOT "current" NOT "Speed Of Light" ; [arxiv.org/search/advanced?advanced=&terms-0-operator=AND&terms-0-term=electric&terms-0-field=all&terms-1-operator=AND&terms-1-term=physics.class-ph&terms-1-field=all&terms-2-operator=NOT&terms-2-term=astro-ph&terms-2-field=all&terms-6-operator=NOT&terms-6-term=cond-mat&terms-6-field=all&terms-7-operator=NOT&terms-7-term=gr-qc&terms-7-field=all&terms-8-operator=NOT&terms-8-term=hep-ex&terms-8-field=all&terms-9-operator=NOT&terms-9-term=hep-lat&terms-9-field=all&terms-10-operator=NOT&terms-10-term=hep-ph&terms-10-field=all&terms-11-operator=NOT&terms-11-term=hep-th&terms-11-field=all&terms-12-operator=NOT&terms-12-term=math-ph&terms-12-field=all&terms-13-operator=NOT&terms-13-term=nlin&terms-13-field=cross_list_category&terms-14-operator=NOT&terms-14-term=nucl-ex&terms-14-field=all&terms-15-operator=NOT&terms-15-term=nucl-th&terms-15-field=all&terms-16-operator=NOT&terms-16-term=quant-ph&terms-16-field=all&terms-17-operator=NOT&terms-17-term=astro-ph.GA&terms-17-field=all&terms-18-operator=NOT&terms-18-term=astro-ph.CO&terms-18-field=all&terms-19-operator=NOT&terms-19-term=astro-ph.EP&terms-19-field=all&terms-20-operator=NOT&terms-20-term=astro-ph.HE&terms-20-field=all&terms-21-operator=NOT&terms-21-term=astro-ph.IM&terms-21-field=all&terms-22-operator=NOT&terms-22-term=astro-ph.SR&terms-22-field=all&terms-23-operator=NOT&terms-23-term=cond-mat.dis-nn&terms-23-field=all&terms-24-operator=NOT&terms-24-term=cond-mat.mtrl-sci&terms-24-field=all&terms-25-operator=NOT&terms-25-term=cond-mat.mes-hall&terms-25-field=all&terms-26-operator=NOT&terms-26-term=cond-mat.other&terms-26-field=all&terms-27-operator=NOT&terms-27-term=cond-mat.quant-gas&terms-27-field=all&terms-28-operator=NOT&terms-28-term=cond-mat.soft&terms-28-field=all&terms-29-operator=NOT&terms-29-term=cond-mat.stat-mech&terms-29-field=all&terms-30-operator=NOT&terms-30-term=cond-mat.str-el&terms-30-field=all&terms-31-operator=NOT&terms-31-term=cond-mat.supr-con&terms-31-field=all&terms-32-operator=NOT&terms-32-term=nlin.AO&terms-32-field=all&terms-33-operator=NOT&terms-33-term=nlin.CG&terms-33-field=all&terms-34-operator=NOT&terms-34-term=nlin.CD&terms-34-field=all&terms-35-operator=NOT&terms-35-term=nlin.SI&terms-35-field=all&terms-36-operator=NOT&terms-36-term=nlin.PS&terms-36-field=all&terms-37-operator=NOT&terms-37-term=physics.acc-ph&terms-37-field=all&terms-38-operator=NOT&terms-38-term=physics.app-ph&terms-38-field=all&terms-39-operator=NOT&terms-39-term=physics.ao-ph&terms-39-field=all&terms-40-operator=NOT&terms-40-term=physics.atm-clus&terms-40-field=all&terms-41-operator=NOT&terms-41-term=physics.atom-ph&terms-41-field=all&terms-43-operator=NOT&terms-43-term=physics.bio-ph&terms-43-field=all&terms-44-operator=NOT&terms-44-term=physics.chem-ph&terms-44-field=all&terms-45-operator=NOT&terms-45-term=physics.comp-ph&terms-45-field=all&terms-46-operator=NOT&terms-46-term=physics.data-an&terms-46-field=all&terms-47-operator=NOT&terms-47-term=physics.flu-dyn&terms-47-field=all&terms-48-operator=NOT&terms-48-term=physics.gen-ph&terms-48-field=all&terms-49-operator=NOT&terms-49-term=physics.geo-ph&terms-49-field=all&terms-50-operator=NOT&terms-50-term=physics.hist-ph&terms-50-field=all&terms-51-operator=NOT&terms-51-term=physics.ins-det&terms-51-field=all&terms-52-operator=NOT&terms-52-term=physics.med-ph&terms-52-field=all&terms-53-operator=NOT&terms-53-term=physics.optics&terms-53-field=all&terms-54-operator=NOT&terms-54-term=physics.soc-ph&terms-54-field=all&terms-55-operator=NOT&terms-55-term=physics.ed-ph&terms-55-field=all&terms-56-operator=NOT&terms-56-term=physics.plasm-ph&terms-56-field=all&terms-57-operator=NOT&terms-57-term=physics.pop-ph&terms-57-field=all&terms-58-operator=NOT&terms-58-term=physics.space-ph&terms-58-field=all&terms-59-operator=NOT&terms-59-term=eess.AS&terms-59-field=all&terms-60-operator=NOT&terms-60-term=electromagnet&terms-60-field=all&terms-61-operator=NOT&terms-61-term=circuit&terms-61-field=all&terms-62-operator=NOT&terms-62-term=maxwell&terms-62-field=all&terms-63-operator=NOT&terms-63-term=current&terms-63-field=all] valid for Request.
Invalid: [ &terms-60-operator=NOT&terms-60-term=eess.IV&terms-60-field=all&terms-61-operator=NOT&terms-61-term=eess.SP&terms-61-field=all&terms-62-operator=NOT&terms-62-term=eess.SY&terms-62-field=all&terms-63-operator=NOT&terms-63-term=econ.EM&terms-63-field=all&terms-64-operator=NOT&terms-64-term=econ.GN&terms-64-field=all&terms-65-operator=NOT&terms-65-term=econ.TH&terms-65-field=all&terms-66-operator=NOT&terms-66-term=math.AC&terms-66-field=all&terms-67-operator=NOT&terms-67-term=math.AG&terms-67-field=all&terms-68-operator=NOT&terms-68-term=math.AP&terms-68-field=all&terms-69-operator=NOT&terms-69-term=math.AT&terms-69-field=all&terms-70-operator=NOT&terms-70-term=math.CA&terms-70-field=all&terms-71-operator=NOT&terms-71-term=math.CO&terms-71-field=all&terms-72-operator=NOT&terms-72-term=math.CT&terms-72-field=all&terms-73-operator=NOT&terms-73-term=math.CV&terms-73-field=all&terms-74-operator=NOT&terms-74-term=math.DG&terms-74-field=all&terms-75-operator=NOT&terms-75-term=math.DS&terms-75-field=all&terms-76-operator=NOT&terms-76-term=math.FA&terms-76-field=all&terms-77-operator=NOT&terms-77-term=math.GM&terms-77-field=all&terms-78-operator=NOT&terms-78-term=math.GN&terms-78-field=all&terms-79-operator=NOT&terms-79-term=math.GR&terms-79-field=all&terms-80-operator=NOT&terms-80-term=math.GT&terms-80-field=all&terms-81-operator=NOT&terms-81-term=math.HO&terms-81-field=all&terms-82-operator=NOT&terms-82-term=math.IT&terms-82-field=all&terms-83-operator=NOT&terms-83-term=math.KT&terms-83-field=all&terms-84-operator=NOT&terms-84-term=math.LO&terms-84-field=all&terms-85-operator=NOT&terms-85-term=math.MG&terms-85-field=all&terms-86-operator=NOT&terms-86-term=math.MP&terms-86-field=all&terms-87-operator=NOT&terms-87-term=math.NA&terms-87-field=all&terms-88-operator=NOT&terms-88-term=math.NT&terms-88-field=all&terms-89-operator=NOT&terms-89-term=math.OA&terms-89-field=all&terms-90-operator=NOT&terms-90-term=math.OC&terms-90-field=all&terms-91-operator=NOT&terms-91-term=math.PR&terms-91-field=all&terms-92-operator=NOT&terms-92-term=math.QA&terms-92-field=all&terms-93-operator=NOT&terms-93-term=math.RA&terms-93-field=all&terms-94-operator=NOT&terms-94-term=math.RT&terms-94-field=all&terms-95-operator=NOT&terms-95-term=math.SG&terms-95-field=all&terms-96-operator=NOT&terms-96-term=math.SP&terms-96-field=all&terms-97-operator=NOT&terms-97-term=math.ST&terms-97-field=all ] ;
physics.stackexchange .com/search?&q="test"+[classical-physics]+-[newtonian-mechanics]+-[lagrangian-formalism]+-[hamiltonian-formalism]+-[force]+-[energy]+-[newtonian-gravity]+-[special-relativity]+-[quantum-mechanics]+-[potential-energy]+-[probability]+-[quantum-field-theory]+-[electrostatics]+-[general-relativity]+-[nuclear-physics]+-[computational-physics]+-[moment-of-inertia]+-[vectors]+-[relativity]+-[relative-motion]+-[celestial-mechanics]+-[applied-physics]+-[electromagnetism]+-[classical-electrodynamics]+-[biology]+-[statistical-mechanics]+-[rotational-dynamics]+-[coordinate-systems]+-[phase-space]+-[constrained-dynamics ]+-[fluid-dynamics]+-[angular-momentum]+-[variational-principle]+-[momentum]+-[energy-conservation]+-[kinematics]+-[friction]+-[conservation-laws]+-[harmonic-oscillator]+-[work]+-[symmetry]+-[stability]+-[stress-strain]+-[aerodynamics]+-[interferometry]+-[orbital-motion]+-[elasticity]+-[geometry]+-[potential]+-[time]+-[solid-state-physics]+-[material-science]+-[models]+-[solid-mechanics]+-[oscillators]+-[waves]+-[determinism]+-[velocity]+-[mathematics]+-[analyticity]+-[gravity]+-[virial-theorem]+-[thermodynamics]+-[reversibility]+-[adiabatic]+-[temperature]+-[thermal-conductivity]+-[linear-algebra]+-[rotation]+-[vacuum]+-[laboratory-safety]+-[pressure]+-[angular-velocity]+-[mathematical-physics]+-[rocket-science]+-[drag]+-[chaos-theory]+-[complex-systems]+-[calculus]+-[integration]+-[specific-reference]+-[torque]+-[rigid-body-dynamics]+-[projectile]+-[everyday-life]+-[doppler-effect]+-[flow]+-[aircraft]+-[stochastic-processes]+-[statics]+-[scattering-cross-section]+-[vibrations]+-[variational-calculus]+-[centrifugal-force]+-[centripetal-force]+-[rotational-kinematics]+-[differential-equations]+-[structural-beam]+-[moment]+-[inertia]+-[terminology]+-[integrals-of-motion]+-[continuum-mechanics]+-[acoustics]+-[astrophysics]+-[fluid-statics]+-[dimensional-analysis]+-[reference-frames]+-[variation]+-[brownian-motion]+-[resonance]+-[three-body-problem]+-[spring]+-[scaling]+-[galilean-relativity]+-[equilibrium]+-[complex-numbers]+-[collision]+-[polymers]+-[curvature]+-[acceleration]+-[differential-geometry]+-[reflection]+-[thermal-conductivity]+-[thermal-radiation]+-[point-particles]+-[eigenvalue]+-[topology]+-[faster-than-light]+-[molecular-dynamics]+-[string]+-[measurements]+-[error-analysis]+-[mass]+-[differentiation]+-[notation]+-[buoyancy]+-[definition]+-[coupled-oscillators]+-[normal-modes]+-[degrees-of-freedom]+-[differential-geometry]+-[structural-beam]+-[free-body-diagram]+-[popular-science]+-[condensed-matter]+-[electromagnetic-radiation]+-[electric-fields]+-[spinors]+-[approximations]+-[dipole]+-[multipole-expansion]+-[spherical-harmonics]+-[brachistochrone-problem]+-[gyroscopes]+-[group-theory]+-[inertial-frames]+-[geodesics]+-[weight]+-[astronomy]+-[coriolis-effect]+-[renewable-energy]
magnetic-fields magnetic-moment vector-fields ;
physics.stackexchange .com/search?&q="test"+[newtonian-mechanics]+[lagrangian-formalism]+-[hamiltonian-formalism]+-[special-relativity]+-[quantum-mechanics]+-[probability]+-[quantum-field-theory]+-[electrostatics]+-[general-relativity]+-[nuclear-physics]+-[computational-physics]+-[relativity]+-[relative-motion]+-[celestial-mechanics]+-[applied-physics]+-[electromagnetism]+-[classical-electrodynamics]+-[biology]+-[statistical-mechanics]+-[quantum-optics]+-[electric-fields]+-[faster-than-light]+-[astronomy]+-[electromagnetic-radiation] ;
physics.stackexchange .com/search?&q=%22test%22+[classical-physics]+[classical-field-theory]+-[hamiltonian-formalism]+-[special-relativity]+-[quantum-mechanics]+-[probability]+-[quantum-field-theory]+-[electrostatics]+-[general-relativity]+-[nuclear-physics]+-[computational-physics]+-[relativity]+-[relative-motion]+-[celestial-mechanics]+-[applied-physics]+-[electromagnetism]+-[classical-electrodynamics]+-[biology]+-[statistical-mechanics]+-[quantum-optics]+-[electric-fields]+-[faster-than-light]+-[astronomy]+-[electromagnetic-radiation] ;
https://thelib.net/1032837-elements-of-classical-physics.html ;
https://www.mdpi.com/search?q=test&journal=physics&section=515 ;
https://theclassicalphysics-wordpress-com.translate.goog/?s=test&_x_tr_sl=es&_x_tr_tl=en ;
https://hsm.stackexchange.com/search?&q=test+[newton]+[lagrange]+-[quantum-mechanics]+-[quantum-field-theory]+-[relativity-theory]+-[theoretical-physics]+-[statistical-mechanics]+-[electromagnetism]+-[feynman]+-[astronomy]+-[celestial-mechanics]+-[archimedes]+-[galileo]+-[einstein]+-[middle-ages]+-[boltzmann]+-[antiquity]+-[17th-century]+-[16th-century]+-[kepler]+-[radiation] ;
https://vixra.org/search.html : "vixra.org/class"   "Test" "classical physics" -"quantum" -"relativity" -"maxwell" -"electromagnetism" -"electron" -"electromagnetic" -"current" -"Einstein" -"electrodynamics";
https://vixra.org/faq : "The "All" listings and category listings that are linked from the main page show "recent" submissions and "replacements" only."; Book: Le Chapèlle (1740)-(1741).

Classical Physics-search-note:a



Failed classical physics-search-note:v
https://hsm.stackexchange.com/search?&q=test+[newton]+[lagrange]+-[quantum-mechanics]+-[quantum-field-theory]+-[relativity-theory]+-[theoretical-physics]+-[statistical-mechanics]+-[electromagnetism]+-[feynman]+-[astronomy]+-[celestial-mechanics]+-[archimedes]+-[galileo]+-[einstein]+-[middle-ages]+-[boltzmann]+-[antiquity]+-[17th-century]+-[16th-century]+-[kepler]+-[radiation] Too few with just Lagrange & Newton, classical-mechanics & mathematical-physics.; 
2025.04.27/old.reddit .com/r/apcalculusbcapphysics : Too few posts.; 2025.04.27/ reddit Alevelphysics; < 2025.04.27/tutorchase. com/blog/a-level-physics-a-complete-guide : Modern physics, quantum physics & relativity., "approximately 40% of the content requiring the application of mathematical skills to solve physics problems.", "particle physics, astrophysics, and nuclear physics, each requiring a deep understanding of both theoretical and mathematical principles."; 2025.04.27/ reddit AskPhysics101
Failed classical physics-search-note:a

Few classical physics-search-note:v
2025.04.29/physics.stackexchange .com/questions/tagged/classical-mechanics+classical-field-theory?tab=Newest
Few classical physics-search-note:a

Classical physics-resources:v
2026.02.01/link.springer .com/subjects/classical-and-continuum-physics
Classical physics-resources:a

Center of classical physics:v 
2025.04.04/medium .com/@brechtcorbeel/how-do-quantum-mechanics-and-classical-physics-differ-60dab49543a1 : Newtons 3 laws of motion. ; 2025.04.04/amazon. com/Great-Courses-Ideas-Classical-Physics/dp/B0013EPAF2 : "Classical physics is about how things move, why they move, and how they work. It's about making sense of motion, gravity, light, heat, sound, electricity, and magnetism, and seeing how these phenomena interweave to create the rich tapestry of everyday experience."; 2025.04.04/eatmy .news/2023/09/quantum-physics.html : Newtons 3 laws of motion; 2025.05.04/icr .org/article/545/ : "Modern physical science (at least classical physics) was centered around the electro-magnetic spectrum, which included all the varieties of force and energy in nature—light, heat, sound, electricity, magnetism, chemical energy, etc.—everything except gravity and nuclear energy. Light, of course, in a sense covers the whole spectrum, from long-wave-length infra-red to short-wave ultra-violet radiation, with the visible light spectrum occupying the key center, as it were.
In a significant sense, light energy is thus the most basic energy of all";
2026.03.22/clrn .org/what-is-classical-physics/ : "cornerstone of classical physics, Newtonian mechanics provides a  mathematical description of motion and forces."
Center of classical physics:a



Classical physics job-note:v
2025.03.20/quora .com/Which-fields-of-physics-have-a-demand-for-more-experimental-physicists : "sept/oct 2012:
* Condensed matter physics: 13 Experiment/5 Theory
* Astrophysics and Cosmology: 5 Experiment or Observation/5 Theory
* High Energy physics, Nuclear Physics, and Particle Physics: 7 Experiment/3 Theory
* AMO: 1 Experiment/1 Theory
* Biophysics: 4 Experiment/0 Theory
Soft Matter: 1 Experiment/0 Theory", August-November. So far, I have only looked at October and November 2014: "	•	Condensed matter physics: 30 Experiment/14 Theory
* Astrophysics and Cosmology: 14 Experiment or Observation/11 Theory
* High Energy physics, Nuclear Physics, and Particle Physics: 9 Experiment/7 Theory
* AMO: 6 Experiment/4 Theory
* Biophysics: 5 Experiment/4 Theory
Soft Matter: 3 Experiment/3 Theory", Aug-Nov 2017: "	•	Condensed matter physics: 14 Experiment/5 Theory
* Astrophysics and Cosmology: 9 Experiment or Observation/11 Theory
* High Energy physics, Nuclear Physics, and Particle Physics: 7 Experiment/5 Theory
* AMO: 9 Experiment/1 Theory
* Biophysics: 4 Experiment/1 Theory
* Soft Matter: 3 Experiment/0 Theory
* Quantum optics/optics: 3
Quantum information: 2", "Almost every field has more experimental positions (demand) than theoretical ones. This makes sense because experiments require more manpower (which requires more graduate students and postdocs, which bring in money to the university via tuition and/or overhead) and materials/supplies (which brings in money to the university via overhead). Condensed matter is particularly skewed towards experimentalists, but there are more theory positions in that field than any of the others (at least in 2014).", (Connection to classical physics's center being 18th century-narrative): 2K Upvotes: "Experimental physics is not for the curious. Curious people can learn more in a few hours in the library than an experimental physicist can learn in a year.
Experimental physics is for the adventurer. Think of the early explorers, working under difficult conditions, in foreign lands, short of money, short of food, not knowing if what they were pursuing even existed. They lived with discomfort. They were seeking discovery, and they did it by surrounding themselves with things they didn't understand but struggled to figure out. And they were constantly attacked by the natives.", "Many people dislike experimental physics because of the uncertainty, the long time it takes to get anywhere, the difficulty of analyzing data with high self-skepticism. But for the few, the proud, the experimentalists, it feels like living the life of the ancient explorers, of Captain James Cook, of Admiral Perry, of Burton and Speke.", "“orbits” of electrons around the nucleus of an atom. At the end of the 19th century, an atom was thought to be like a currant bun, with electrons being the currants stuck to the surface." "almost empty space"..."electrons moving in a field generate electromagnetic radiation. That means they emit energy. Classical physics (Newton’s 2nd Law) says you can’t create energy from nothing so the electron" (Newton's 1st & 2nd are same. N. 3rd law (Opposing force cause equivalent reaction.) is weakened according to another article.), "**not** aided by experimental math (Euler solved it)", "“experimental mathematics” is real; but at least 99% of all math investigations has nothing to do with it.
In contrast, physics is fundamentally experimental in nature. More than half the intellectual effort going into physics is on the experimental side, and a theory which is pretty but allows no possible experimental verification is generally derided (although some very nice theoretical effects which may never see experimental verification but could in principle are applauded — for example, Hawing radiation).", (Brian Vant-Hull MA in Physics, Johns Hopkins University : "experimentalist take almost twice as long to get their PhD as theorists. But theorists get all the glory.
Before I studied physics in college I had mentioned to a college professor that I didn’t think I was “good” enough to be a theorist. He gave me a look and said “experiment is the higher calling”. It took me over a decade to fully understand the truth of that statement."), "Theoretical physicists often understand the extrapolations of a theory to regions far beyond technology.", "Experimental physicists often know how the same theory would apply to laboratory equipment on a bread board scale."; 2025.03.20/quora .com/I-want-to-take-Physics-as-my-career-Should-I-take-experimental-or-theoretical-physics-What-is-the-difference-between-the-two : "atomic scale (Quantum Physics), human scale (Classical Physics) and cosmic scale (Cosmology & Astrophysics)", "Theoretical Physicists spend their time, energy and resources to conceive and develop models (*usually conceptual, philosophical and thoroughly mathematical) in order to describe observable or non-observable physical phenomena and also the laws governing the interactions and interrelations of matter and energy at all scales. Experimental Physicists on the other hand spend their time, energy and equipment (resources) performing tests and experimentation on models and theories. Experimental Physicists could be very practical in the sense that they are more inclined to become Engineers using physical principles, laws and models to invent technologies - of the present and of the future. Both Theoretical and Experimental Physics seem like imperatives for investigating the universe or studying physics. They are the Yin and Yang of the discipline. As regards physics as a profession, the job responsibilities separates both imperatives. The professional responsibility of a Theoretical Physicist include: Building conceptual models of the physical properties of the complex universe (through Thought Experiments mostly) Making mathematical analyses and predictions about these ‘concepts’ relating to the complex phenomena we experience and observe. Writing papers and debating about right or wrong theories like Bohr–Einstein debates (This is so cool, it made me fall in love with Theoretical Physics)" (Connection to starting debate culture in late-18th century.) "The professional responsibility of an Experimental Physicist include: Testing the models and theories made by Theoretical Physicist (* just like those guys who tested Einstein’s hypothesis about the quantum world — quantum entanglement, spooky actions, and the ‘to be or not to be’ scenario) Developing ways to use the properties of matter and energy in industry applications (very cool) The models created by Theoretical Physicists needs data - lots of them - hence, Experimental Physicists observe, record and analyze data for the efficiency and utility of the models.", "general physics refers to the typical university-level sequence of Mechanics, Electricity, and Magnetism with attendant lab courses. While there are exceptions, rarely do these courses cover any ground on topics since 1900. These phenomena are extremely well understood and essential to further study in physics. Here the questions and patterns are known and understood, if potentially difficult (the classical mechanics of a spinning top is a great example of a straightforward physical system with deep theoretical challenges)." (Except later third of first grade university physics with statistical Hamiltonian mechanics being next to quantum mechanics & letters of recommendation politicizing. They are crucial for someone to become a researcher & so separates between researcher & engineer by not making letters of these.); 2025.03.20/old.reddit .com/r/Physics/comments/7ivnd6/i_like_classical_mechanics_more_than_modern/ : "Outside of a few simple pressure, viscosity, and flow rate problems in Physics 1, there's not much you can teach an undergraduate physics student.", jtap114: "nonlinear dynamics and chaos completely which is very unfortunate as I am recently realizing this is sort of the "final frontier" of classical mechanics.", "physics-based study, modeling, and analysis of physical bodies and mechanical systems", "less interested in micro-scale phenomena. In classical, mechanics, the exact same math/physics might be involved to model an electron orbit as planetary orbit. But I am much less interested in the former.", (goobuh-fish 8 points 7 y:  You sound a lot like me as an undergrad. I didn't enjoy quantum at all but I loved classical mechanics and fluid mechanics. I decided to jump ship from physics and go to graduate school for aerospace engineering. I'm very glad I did. Like you I initially thought I would do astrodynamics but after taking some classes in both fluids and astrodynamics I found fluids more interesting.), (radarsat1 3 points 7 years ago  To generalize on the "rocket science" suggestion, I think the subject of controls engineering might be right up yout alley. How do you make use of a system model to design feedback signals that change the behaviour to what you want. It involves a lot of mathematics and state space modeling as well as equations of motion, transfer functions, system identification, dealing with non-linearities in a formal way, etc.), ( [–]jtap114[S] 3 points 7 years ago  Thank you for this. "Dynamics & Control" is an area of AeroE/MechE that many have now recommended to me and is, in fact, the area that first appealed to me. But it is the Dynamics side that attracts me. I don't really know what controls is yet but it seems more in the world of information science and pretty far from physics. I am sort of seeing it just as a way that I can get to my real interest in dynamics. But many people have suggested controls so I am gaining more confidence that it will be a good fit for me. Especially since it seems very versatile and campatible with astrodynamics as well as aircraft, robots, etc.
 [–]radarsat1 3 points 7 years ago  Ah, well fair enough, there ia plenty of room for people with a serious interest in pure dynamics too, I am sure. I just recommend, don't discount engineering just because it is not "physics", because there is a lot of room for a deep understanding of mechanics within it, which seems to be your interest
 [–]radarsat1 2 points 7 years ago  By the way another really interesting field that you mind look into is biomechanics, the science of how the materials in biology work. I have history studying haptics, (perception of touch) which involves contact mechanics, and mechanoreceptors which are really interesting since they are little machines that translate mechanical energy into neuronal triggers), (jtap114: my interest in classical mechanics taking me just about anywhere (astrodynamics, dynamics & control, structures, aerodynamics, robot dynamics, biomechanics, etc). But grad school is where I must pick one), (velax1:Astrophysics 13 points 7 years ago 
Astronomer here. I don't think astronomy is appropriate, since a lot of astronomy and astrophysics is applying E&M, quantum physics, thermodynamics and so on to observational data or when modeling the behavior of astrophysical sources. Dynamics is only a tiny bit of what astronomy is all about, and unless you work on very specific subfields (i.e., Galactic dynamics, celestial mechanics, astrometry)), (velax1:Astrophysics: engineering is more versatile than physics I think I have to disagree with you. The reason is that a physics education is significantly broader than an engineering education, in that at the end of a physics degree you know the foundations of most areas of engineering. In other words: engineers tend to be specialists, physicists tend to be generalists. This means that you will find a large number of physicists doing engineering R&D, just because physicists tend to be much better in lateral thinking than engineers, because of their broader view on things. A side effect is that physicists then do not have the nitty gritty knowledge for the details of the implementation.), (liked classical mechanics, you may be interested in orbital mechanics, control, and structures. If you do orbital to any serious degree, you'll need relativity and classical mechanics a lot. Control makes use of you harmonic oscillations knowledge, and lots of math. Structures makes use of basic mechanics, and then there's a bunch of new stuff about material properties...If job security is important to you, I'd consider getting the masters in mechanical engineering instead. You'll be slightly less competitive in the aerospace sector, but you'll have a lot more options if that economic sector is going through a downturn.), "I like Space.", (The_Matias: Mechanics in aerospace engineering refers to both dynamics and structural/fluid/solid mechanics. Keep in mind that aerospace engineering is the most "physicsy" of all the engineering fields, so this may not be true for pure mechanical or other engineering disciplines., "pure, non-applied classical mechanics, they do like to use the word "dynamics"", Basic mechanics: "really basic; like, sum of all forces = 0 for static systems, how to find a centre of mass, moment of inertia, moment coupling, etc.", finished an undergrad in physics from a reputable university, you won't be overwhelmed by the math in engineering. Don't get me wrong, it's not easier, especially in grad school, but there's no huge wall you'll hit. You should have a fairly good linear algebra background from quantum mechanics' index notation, and from times when you've solved large linear systems for whatever problem.), (The_MatiasUndergraduate 1 point 7 years ago  I'm a mechanics guy: fluid, solid, classical, you name it.), (The_Matias has 2 undergrads.), (jtap114[S] 3 points 7 y: unfortunate since nonlinear dynamics seems like it is the "final frontier" of classical mechanics. It also seems to be a huge thing in engineering.), (cbl859: 3 points 7 y: As someone with a PHD in physics > jtap114[S] 1 point 7 years ago  The basic precepts of physics can be applied anywhere. It has been a fantastic foundation for me. This is one of the things I really like about physics. In theory, a physics "expert" can explain just about everything.), (jtap114[S] 1 point 7 years ago  kinematics is a branch of classical mechanics. Classical Mechanics is: Applied Mechanics, Celestial Mechanics, Continuum Mechanics, Dynamics, Kinematics, Kinetics, Statics, and Statistical Mechanics. (according to Wikipedia). I think engineering uses these terms a lot more than physics. I think the bulk of what physics think of as classical mechanics is Dynamics and Continuum Mechanics (kinetics, kinematics, and celestial mechanics are all absorbed into those).), (jtap114: 2 points 7 years ago: "difference between dynamics (the area of physics/mechanics) and Dynamical Systems (the area of math)? Googling "symplectic geometry""), (like classical stuff, try aeroE or mechE or materials science.), ("wind energy engineering would be worth looking into. Wind turbines are dynamic structures. Most of the calculations are carried out using various numerical methods" But aerospace & numeral methods belongs to later classical physics being closer to modern mathematizied science. dacemirror.sci-hub .ru/journal-article/0d4d4423fe9667e7df215f0beb101c63/lippmann1998.pdf : Horst Lippmann one of the most intema- tionally renowned scientists in his field. (Mechanical engineering): p.3: "Nowadays hardly anybody can resist the seduction emanating from modem desk computers, even more so as the overwhelming majority of rigorously formu- lated scientific problems, (whatever this means) must eventu- ally be solved using numerical tools. However there are at least three domains of application where an analytic proce-"), ("Nonlinear dynamics and Chaos is really cool. It has lots of structure from classical mechanics. Have a look at this book Astrophysics has also overlap with classical mechanics, e.g. for my MSc thesis I worked with Hamiltons equations with a general relativity metric." later.), (jtap114: 1p 7y: "controls. This is something I am very unfamiliar with but seems to be inseparable from dynamics in engineering. I have done a lot of investigating into grad aero/mech engineering programs and "dynamics & control" is always a big area."), (jtap114: "I would say I'm more into the theoretical side of things. But I am only basing this on the fact that I hated labs as an undergrad. I don't have enough experience to really know. I have zero experience with computational work. Everything we did was analytical and done by hand." Not a stable fan of classical physics.), 1p 7y: Plasma physics, deleted: 1p: 6y: "fluid dynamics, soft matter experimental physics, or theoretical interdisciplinary physics? One of my college physics professor spends most of his time on fluid dynamics, but also dabbles into other related subjects. He does very little modern physics (like QM, GR, or what I call "romantic" physics)"; 2025.04.04/blogspot .com/2016/02/what-are-best-interdisciplinary-courses.html : "best interdisciplinary courses for undergraduate science majors?", Bio-physics is purely classical physics. 1 Comment suggest with 3 arguments material science.; old.reddit .com/r/Physics/comments/6405ag/taing_qm_course_for_1st_time_not_confident_in_my/?rdt=46950 : Plasma Physics-tag: mangoman51: "research is purely classical physics (computational plasma)"; 2025.04.04/old.reddit .com/r/Physics/comments/b54enm/why_is_classical_physics_seen_as_so_unsexy/ : "22 points 6 years ago 
Among the people who actually do this for a living, things like 'Dynamical systems' and 'Classical Field Theories' are active and popular fields.", "mathematics or engineering departments, rather than the physics department.", "11 points 6 years ago 
That’s what we call engineering these days. We’re working out the kinks while you physicists moved on to a new love.", asmith97 14 points 6 years ago  Condensed matter (unless it’s soft matter) is definitely mostly quantum.
Classical physics job-note:a

Classical physics-application:v
2026.03.22/clrn .org/what-is-classical-physics/ : Structural Engineering: Statics, Strength of Materials, Elasticity, Fluid Dynamics: Navier-Stokes Equations, Bernoulli’s Principle, Thermodynamics, Robotics: Newtonian Mechanics, Kinematics, Dynamics, Control Systems: Linear Systems Theory, Feedback Control, Classical Control Theory, Acoustic Engineering: Wave Mechanics, Sound Propagation, "everyday life and engineering applications", "crucial skillset for any engineer, scientist or tech professional." (Maybe tech professional for being neither engineer nor scientist perse is closest to classical physicist. Scientific engineer could fit too.) 
Classical physics-application:a

Experimental & mechanical engineering:v
2025.03.20/scholarshipdb .net/condensed-matter-theory-scholarships-in-mechanical-engineering-l?r_q=theoretical+condensed+matter+physics ; libguides.wvutech .edu/c.php?g=852352&p=6114379./ ; esmech.engin.umich .edu ; syllabi.engineering.osu .edu/syllabi/mecheng_3870 : "Measurements and Data Analysis in Mechanical Engineering", "Foundation in experimental measurement and data analysis in mechanical engineering; team planning and execution of experiments; technical report writing."; scribd .com/document/627858396/Mechanical-Engineering-Lab-Report-Format : "Mechanical Engineering Lab Report Format | PDF | Experiment | Data -"; 2025.03.21/researchgate .net/profile/Adrian-Knapczyk/publication/333905415_ANALYSIS_OF_RESEARCH_TRENDS_IN_THE_FIELD_OF_MECHANICAL_ENGINEERING/links/5d0bc643299bf1547c714d0e/ANALYSIS-OF-RESEARCH-TRENDS-IN-THE-FIELD-OF-MECHANICAL-ENGINEERING.pdf?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InNjaWVudGlmaWNDb250cmlidXRpb25zIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIn19 : 2002-2017 data: p.2: "division and domains involved in mechanical engineering is well known [1]develop, manufacture, operate, and use mechanical artifacts.\”--Publisher description. Fundamentals of Mechanical Engineering -- Introduction to Mathematics for Mechanical Engineering -- Complex Analysis -- Differential Equations -- Laplace Transformation -- Fourier Analysis -- Linear Algebra -- Mechanics -- Statics of Rigid Bodies -- Dynamics -- Applications in Mechanical Engineering -- Materials Science and Engineering -- Atomic Structure and Microstructure -- Microstructure Characterization -- Mechanical Properties -- Physical Properties -- Nondestructive Inspection", p.3: "journal Applied Mechanics Reviews has been selected for further analysis, which is the only scientific activity conducted exclusively in the field of Mechanical Engineering."
Experimental & mechanical engineering:a

Mechanical engineering-note:v
2025.03.22/ 2016-10-07: Zach Star: What is Mechanical Engineering?: 1.Statics 2.Dynamics (3.Very calculus-based fluid mechanics. How car brakes works. How airplane works.), Also Thermodynamics. How first steam engine was created & how similar ideas are still used today in power plant today. ; Applied Mechanical Review does not only show solely mechanical engineering: 2025.03.23/scholars.uky .edu/en/publications/dynamic-forces-induced-by-a-single-pedestrian-a-literature-review : "Civil Engineering", but "ASJC Scopus subject areas
		Mechanical Engineering" in 2025.03.23/asmedigitalcollection.asme .org/appliedmechanicsreviews/article-abstract/69/2/020802/370050/Dynamic-Forces-Induced-by-a-Single-Pedestrian-A ; 
2025.03.26/dacemirror.sci-hub .ru/journal-article/0d4d4423fe9667e7df215f0beb101c63/lippmann1998.pdf?download=true : p.5 : They don't have to be scientific experts. They must clearly describe the problem in a phenomenological way & that quick answers aren't always true & vice versa., p.7: "borderline of Mechani- cal Sciences in their proper meaning, ie, towards Materials Sciences. I am referring to the field of Cosserat plasticity"; 
2025.03.25/moscow.sci-hub .ru/4849/8329ca2a55b3a21ed7528b2ed80af4b1/reis2006.pdf?download=true : p.7: "Our society established connections, links, and networks with the purpose of exchanging goods, energy, and information. These spatially dis- tributed patterns are everywhere: transportation routes, urban growth, energy, financial and communication networks.", p.11: "Engineers create systems with purpose and try to increase their performance in time.", "purpose of a stem is to hold and provide leaves with water and nutrients, while that of river basins is to collect superficial water and deliver it into oceans.", Nature uses "time, evolution, tries, errors, and selecting every time the solutions that bring us closer to better flow access." "same law as natural flow systems" shows "to engineer is natural." Conclusion: "just a different point of view of things"..."of the engineer about the forms of nature. Constructal theory proposes to see" things "like machines that are subjected to constraints, which is to obtain maximum efficiency." , Applied constructal theory to natural & social science.; 2025.03.27/2024.sci-hub .ru/4927/b6511096130995c4c47abbd4dea037d3/howell1986.pdf : p.1: "Applied mechanics research has become a critical element in many of the areas which can promote improved products and process efficiency."; 2025.03.28/peer.asee .org/a-hands-on-first-year-mechanical-engineering-course.pdf p.3 : "Today there are no purely mechanical engineering devices. An automobile, which used to be mechanical engineering marvel, now has numerous embedded microprocessors in various subsystems, from anti-lock brakes to smart suspension controlled by software. Modern
 mechanical engineers must be conversant with all aspects of product design and must understand the multi-disciplinary nature of engineering."; 2025.03.28/pure.tudelft .nl/admin/files/132004801/Kartik_Thesis_final.pdf : Until later half of 20th century, we mechanical engineers believed in balance being natural law. Now it's chaos theory as this system leaning towards disorder. Entropy of an isolated system always increases due 2nd law of thermodynamics.; 2025.03.28/etools .ch all : google .com/search?q=%22mechanical+engineering%22+%22journal%22+%22monodisciplinary%22 : "
  	Monodisciplinary collaboration disrupts science more than … 5 Nov 2023 — Mechanical engineering; applied mechanics … Journal of Health Economics, Journal of Labor Economics, and Journal of Monetary Economics … URL: https://asistdl.onlinelibr…0.1002/asi.24840"
Mechanical engineering-note:a

Particle physics-note:v
2026.01.01/academia .edu/127799319/Interpreting_Physics : p.7: "There are different philosophical approaches to the interpretation of quantum 
mechanics and quantum field theory. Most share a common feature. Interpretation 
is essentially a matter of specifying the physical significance of mathematically 
formulated theories, or of models that relate to theories.", "In contemporary particle physics conclusions from a theory are 
never tested against observations. They are tested against inferences based on observations and 
a network of presuppositions supporting the inferential process of experimental 
physics. This inferential system relies on the highly developed language of physics."
Particle physics-note:a

Classical physics VS Quantum physics:v
Particle physics-note:v
2026.01.01/academia .edu/127799319/Interpreting_Physics : p.7: "The formal one, deduction from axioms, is one that philosophers of science have explored in detail. The infor- mal one, inferences in the developed dialect of physics, remains, to adopt Vico’s famous phrase, terra incognita",
p.8: "The separation of the two inferential systems is not a critical issue in classi- cal, or pre-quantum, physics. The evolution of the language of physics and the co-evolution of mathematics and physics since the seventeenth century harmonized the relation between the two. The redevelopment of the foundations of mathematics at the beginning of the nineteenth century initiated a separation between mathe- matics and physics. However classical physicists, almost without exception, relied on the older physicalistic mathematics of Euler and Lagrange." (Describing classical physics's math.) "The development of quantum physics in the mid 1920s led to a linguistic crisis. The familiar language of physics could be used to report an individual experiment without contradictions. However, an attempt to extend this reporting language to broader contexts could engender contradictions." (Broader scope of concepts contradicts itself.) "Most physicists originally thought of this in terms of puz- zling properties of subatomic particles.", "Niels Bohr treated this as a problem about concepts, not objects. His somewhat nebulous doctrine of complementarity provided an expe- dient for avoiding difficulties. He contended that the language of classical physics is an extension of ordinary language and that its usage in experimental contexts must meet the conditions for the unambiguous communication of experimental informa- tion. If experimenters limited the extended usage of key terms in classical physics to a particular experimental context and rejected further extensions to other experi- mental situations, then they avoided contradictions.",
"Philosophers, and even some historians, of science have regularly castigated Bohr’s complementarity interpretation of quantum mechanics as naive, ad hoc, arbi- trary, outmoded, and even irrational. Most of these criticisms involved a serious misunderstanding. Bohr never intended an interpretation of quantum mechanics as a theory. We are, he contended, suspended in language. He treated mathematical formalisms as useful tools, not as theories to be interpreted. He struggled to clarify the basic concepts of physics and the limits of their valid applicability. These strug- gles supply a point of departure for an analysis of the role of language in quantum physics and for the interrelation between the reporting of experimental results and theories.", "Anglo-American philosophy, subsequent to Quine and Sellars, experienced a split between philosophers of science and analysts.",
p.9: "Accepted philosophical methods supplied no basis for relating ordinary language analysis to philosophy of science, and no systematic way of relating philosophy of science to the history of science. Yet, the need remained. What Hanson actually did, with limited success, was to pick problems, chiefly in astronomy, particle physics, and aeronautics, involving the opposed fields, muddle through particular solutions, and hope that methodological enlightenment would emerge." (Unity between classical physics and quantum physics at least sounds like meta-moderatism.),
p.10: "When I retired from teaching I used my new freedom to begin a systematic exploration of the problem. I found that the only way I could make sense of the specialized extension of language to physics was to track the conceptual evolution involved." (Maybe unity between common sense physics and modern scientific physics.), "The historical analysis in Chapter 2 focuses on the evolution of a specialized language, rather than on ancient physics The intermedi- ate stage involved the co-evolution of physical and mathematical concepts. This, in turn, led to the emergence of the three master theories of classical physics, mechan- ics, thermodynamics, and electrodynamics. Here we are focusing on the classical physics that both supports and conflicts with quantum physics.The final stage, the classical/quantum interface and a recognition of the fundamental role of quantum mechanics required a departure from normal philosophical practices." (explaining development of classical physics.), "Physics is the basic science. The treatment of other philosophical issues often a presupposes an interpretation of physics.";
2026.01.01/45.151.91.208:6060/d3/y/1767318341/10000/g4/libgenrs_nonfiction/libgenrs_nonfiction/791000/6da190e7382bcd22f1bb6ccff1fcd966~/gqbj75mx8m5pVBb-FezoEg/annas-arch-6da190e7382b .pdf : 
p.77: "key to Newton’s creative thought in celestial dynamics was not that he considered forces to be real, primary, or essential properties of bodies or of gross matter, but rather that he could explore the conditions and properties of such forces as if they were real without needing to be able to find a satisfactory answer (or any answer at all) to questions about the independent realty of such forces” (Cohen 1980, p. 253)." (Newton used minimal reason and completely or partially ignored the metaphysics in those forces. Newton might appealed to Infinitism by accepting that restless question-chain is epistemologically valid.),
p.79: "When one regards the universe as a product created by an infinitely wise being and designed with human beings as central, then this shapes the way the universe is understood and the type of questions that seem pertinent." (Connected to Infinitism.), "Aristotle introduced purpose in nature as a brute fact; something far removed form the first mover’s self-contemplation. Medieval Aris- totelians in the Islamic, Jewish, and Christian traditions also recognized purpose in"
p.80: "nature, but attributed it to the plan of creation. This theological orientation remained intact through the scientific revolution. Galileo and Kepler spoke of God as the divine geometer. Descartes methodic doubt drew the line at divine deception. New- ton’s General Scholion at the end of the Principia and Leibniz’s assumption that this is the best of all possible worlds, both put physics in an essentially theological context. In Quine’s terms, physics did not function as the basic science of reality, because theology was the court of last appeal.
This intellectual orientation began to change, not because it was abandoned, but because its explanatory efficacy was eroding. The distinction between intellectualist and voluntarist theologies now seems like an archaic relic. It was as vital an issue to Newton and Leibniz as it had been to Aquinas and Ockham, and played a significant role in the methodology thought proper to investigations in physics. The intellectu- alist position, developed in different ways by Aquinas and Leibniz, stressed the idea that the plan of creation is something intrinsic to the universe. God is a creator, not an architect. The universe, accordingly, must be intelligible in terms of intrinsic principles. In explaining the universe, God should be invoked only as creator, final cause, and for events transcending the natural order." (Transcendence pointing to indefinite regress from Kant, which may points to infinitive uncertainty.) "In principle, this made the study of nature an independent discipline. In practice, philosophers in this tradition tended to put too much reliance on a priori deductions. The voluntarist tradition, stemming from medieval nominalism and Lutheran theology, insisted that God is free to do whatever he wants without regard to the limitations of human understanding. Boyle, Newton, and perhaps Descartes22 were in the voluntarist tradition. If one could not deduce basic features of reality from assumptions concerning the order of creation, then the only reasonable alternative is to investigate and speculate.
The wars of religion spawned by the Reformation and Counter Reformation led to edicts of toleration and a widespread rejection of religious zealotry. This spirit carried over to Enlightenment propaganda and popularizations of science." (Propaganda form Enlightenment.) "Bernard de Fontenelle (1657–1757), the first great popularizer of Cartesian and Newtonian physics, insisted on separating both the physical and biological sciences from any dependence on God as an explanatory principle (See Marsak 1959, sect. IV). Voltaire, du Châtelet, and the French Encyclopedists were, for the most part, neither materialists nor atheists. Yet, they opposed religious intrusions, whether social, political, or intellectual, in science or in their attempt to reform society in accord with ideals shaped by popularizations of Newtonian physics. The constraining influences on physics and its systematic expression moved from theology and metaphysics to systematic observations and mathematical formulations. Theology gradually shifted from an explanatory mode, relating the limited truths of science to the ultimate truths of theology, to a defensive mode, contending that advances in science do not really contradict properly interpreted revealed truth."
Unification of Classical Physics: (As late classical physics since they had the motivation for a theory of everything.) p.84: "classical physics? This admits of various answers. For its creators the issue was not classical physics, but simply physics. The shared goal was one of explaining physical reality through an articulation of its basic ingredients and funda- mental laws. Even those like Fourier and Mach who argued for a phenomenological physics did so because they considered the goal unreachable. This can no longer be considered a goal for classical physics." (Definition of classical physics.), "why simple answers don’t work." (Biased towards complicating things and therefore toward rationalism and quantum mechanics.), "Quantum mechanics has replaced classical physics as the foundational science." (Difference between foundational physics and classical physics.), "But classical physics has not been abandoned. It is still indispensable in treating most aspects of macroscopic reality. Classical formulations still supply a springboard for setting up quantum formulations. The experimental programs that test and constrain quantum theories rely on the validity of classical laws.", "Classical physics describes reality through the application of large-scale deterministic laws. Quantum mechanics does so through small-scale probabilistic laws. These are incompatible foundations.",
p.85: "Histories of mathematics regularly present the early nineteenth century as a turn- ing point in the development of calculus. Cauchy, Dirichlet, Weierstrass, Cantor, and many more, succeeded in putting the calculus on an arithmetical, and eventually a set-theoretical, rather than a physicalistic or geometric, foundation. To a man, clas- sical physicists continued to rely on the Euler-Lagrange formulation of calculus, even after the reformation of the calculus was well established. The only woman prominently involved, Emmy Noether, was too much a disciple of David Hilbert to accept such sloppy math. The reasons for this are clear. Creative physicists were trying to develop physical concepts that were adequate to the phenomena and con- sistent with established physical concepts. Mathematical formulations were introduced chiefly as tools for expressing physical concepts. This effectively reversed the direction of philosophical interpretation. They began with physical concepts and then sought an appropriate mathematical formulation. The clearest example comes from the most creative physicist in the period being treated. Maxwell" (Mathematization over physics of classical physics since early 19th century with the development of calculus. I argue that the mathematization over physics started earlier with Lagrangian analytical mechanics and after 1750..)..."argued that since space, time, fields, and motion are continuous, they should be represented by continuous functions. (See, Niven 1965, Vol. II, pp. 215–229, Maxwell 1954 [1873], pp. 6–8.) Classical physicists also idealized matter and its basic properties as continuous. In dealing with continuous functions it was considered OK to speak of infinitesimals, to treat x + dx as a legitimate addition, and even to treat dy/dx as the ratio of two infinitesimals." (Connection between continuous and infinite regress. Between continuum and continuum mechanics.),
p.86: "spasmodic nineteenth century attempts to unify physics on a foun- dation of atomistic mechanism. Though this failed it left a significant residue, a linguistic framework for classical physics in which mechanical concepts play a foundational role.", "Thomas Kuhn (1977, chap. 3) introduced a useful distinction between the classical physical sciences; astronomy, statics, optics, and mechanics as analysis; and the Baconian sciences. In the classical sciences, experiments were performed chiefly to test the consequences of a hypothesis or to answer a question posed within the existing theory. With Bacon as nominal leader and chief publicist, the Baconian scientists performed experiments with the goal of learning something new, unanticipated from nature. Phenomena that did not lend themselves to familiar classification or fit standard theories were objects of qualita- tive studies and sources of aesthetic pleasure. Even the pages of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society were filled with reports of marvelous phenomena and strange experiences, with the hope that an explanatory account would eventually emerge.2 The practitioners of the new Baconian sciences were often people lacking scientific training and mathematical competence. Experimentation as a source of new knowledge, achieved a preeminent status in England, partially due to the prece- dent of Newton and the Royal Society and partially to the peculiar status of the religious dissidents." (Experimentation over other medias were source of knowledge.) "The non-Conformists, excluded from Oxford and Cambridge, started their own schools and societies. Since their schools did not teach much Latin, Greek, or classical literature, they featured mathematics and science. Two groups typify the new societies. The Birmingham Lunar Society (They met when the moon was full) was founded after James Watt moved to Birmingham in 1744 and became a partner with Matthew Boulton in building steam engines. The membership included Josiah Wedgwood, Erasmus Darwin, and Joseph Priestley. Slightly later, in 1781 people associated with the Unitarian Chapel founded the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. They built a library, a college, a mechanics institute and sup- ported the experimental researches of Priestley, Dalton, and Joule.3
We will focus on the treatment of electrical and thermal phenomena and the struggle to achieve a mathematical account of quantities. Following Heilbron (1979), the development of the study of electricity prior to the nineteenth century may be divided into three stages. The first stage, lasting until 1700, is in the tradition of natural philosophy. Overtly, William Gilbert was opposed to Aristotle and Aris- totelians, with the rather surprising exception of Thomas Aquinas. In spite of this overt opposition, he relied on Aristotelian methods. When he distinguished elec- trical (his term) from magnetic effects, he attributed electrical effects to a material" (Oxford and Cambridge excluded classical physicists. The excluded schools had more math and science and less Latin, Greek or classical literature then them. Even the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society engaged in experimental empiricism first with Baconian scientists being incompetent towards math and scientific training.),
p.87: "cause and magnetic effects to a formal cause. The explanations that soon came to dominate this new science were those elaborated by Jesuit professors, like Athana- sius Kircher and Francesco Lana, trained in an Aristotelian philosophy of nature.", "Magnetism, proper only to the lodestone and not requiring any activity on the part of the experimenter, might be explained in terms of an innate sympathy." (Moving from empirical practice to rationalism with more theory.), "Aristotelian philosophy of nature was soon challenged and eventually replaced by competing philosophies of nature, stemming from Descartes, Boyle, Newton, and Christian Wolff. In spite of differences, they shared enough of a com- mon core so that they could repeat the same experiments, adapt each other’s expla- nations, and carry on a meaningful dialog. This necessitates a sharing of concepts. They also shared a reliance on some version of philosophical essentialism. The basic idea is that the causes on which the phenomena depend must have the properties common to all matter."... (What Aristotelian widespread belief and Newtonian empiricism have in common.) "Though the accounts of what these properties are differed, the accounts were all determined by a conceptual, rather than an empirical analysis. This sharing, in turn, tends to decrease the a priori aspects of philosophical systematization. The meaning of shared terms comes to depend on their common use, rather than on the scholastic type definitions of meaning found in natural philosophy textbooks.
By the mid 1730s common assumptions shared by the natural philosophy tradition in electricity were being undercut." 
"end of the eighteenth century, many physicists were abandoning such theories and natural philosophy explanations and concentrating on quantitative concepts (See Heilbron, chap. XIX). Thus, Aepenius stated the rule that similarly charged bodies repel while dissimilarly charged bodies attract, and advocated ignoring accounts of the mechanism involved." (Qualitative to quantitative research. Empiricism to rationalism.),
p.88: "Galileo held that heat, like other secondary qualities, resides properly in the con- sciousness of the observer as an effect of motions of imperceptible particles within the source. Enlightened philosophers, in both the rationalist and the empiricist tradi- tions, shared the view that secondary qualities reside properly in the consciousness of the observer. Only naive amateurs, or people who deliberately separated their work from prevailing philosophical speculations, would study heat as a property of bodies. By the end of the eighteenth century a few basic concepts had emerged with some degree of clarity. This, in turn, led to a quantitative theory of heat phenomenon.
Tentative attempts to attach numbers to degrees of heat led to the first quantitative law concerning the temperature of mixtures that won any degree of acceptance, the law formulated by G. W. Richmann around 1744.",
p.89: "Both men were very much in the tradition of Baconian science, the non-philosophical, non-mathematical, hands-on approach to nature previously considered. Black sys- tematically discounted both the Baconian motion theory of heat and the theory of heat as a subtle, highly elastic, penetrating fluid. (The term ‘caloric’ was not introduced until 1787.) Both men performed extensive experiments and relied much more on the results of experiments than on any philosophy of nature or any sort of philosophical theory." (Description of baconian science as empirical practice.), 
p.90: "architects of classical physics assumed that physics required a philosophical foundation. Descartes made his theory of knowledge foundational." (And Descartes advocated for an accurate account of dead/potential forces.) "Newton began his Principia by first clarifying the notions of absolute space and time. He developed accounts of impressed force and an atomic theory of matter. Leibniz advocated rel- ative space and time, and living forces." (Kinetic energy.) "Wolff’s philosophy of nature drew heavily on Leibniz." (Yet, they were at odds with each other, especially the late Wolff being against Leibniz's infinite regress beginning from the Big Bang.) "It seemed that even an introductory account of the new physics had to take a stand on these disputed issues. Madam du Châtelet, who translated Newton’s Principia into French and transposed his geometric arguments into the language of calculus, wrote Institutiones de Physique as an expanded version of the physics she taught her son.7 The titles of the opening chapters indicate her fusion of Cartesian epistemology, Leibnizian metaphysics, and Newtonian physics: 1. Principles of Knowledge; 2. On the Existence of God; 3. Of Essence, Attributes, and Modes; 4. Of Hypotheses; 5. Of Space; 6. Of Time, 7. Of Elements of Matter; 8. Of the Nature of Bodies; 9. On the Divisibility and Subtlety of Matter. Euler, Lagrange and the French Newtonians effectively removed mechanics from its putative dependence on atomic assumptions. Lagrange dispensed with philosophical foundations by devel- oping mechanics as a hypothetical-deductive system. The Lagrangian tradition of" (Beginning of Lagrangian mechanics as the newest member of the classical science that fits the most in 19th century.),
p.91: "treating mechanics as a form of analysis, the newest member of the classical sci- ences, continued well into the nineteenth century with Gauss’s Principle of Least Constraint and Hamilton’s Principle of Least Action. Laplace initiated a new systematization, transforming Newton’s mechanistic atomism in atomistic mechanism. He assigned mechanics, rather than a philosophical account of atoms, a foundational role. Then hypotheses concerning atoms and short-range forces not only revived atomism. They also supplied a potential for treating heat, chemical affinities, and other phenomena, within the framework of physics based on a mechanistic foundation. Laplace is usually interpreted as the last and greatest in a distinguished series of French Newtonians. What we wish to consider here, however, is not the continuity between Laplace and his predecessors or contemporaries, but the novel features in Laplace’s treatment of mechanical concepts and methods.
Laplace initiated a new style that Poisson later dubbed ‘physical mechanics’. He used mathematics as an instrument for physical calculations. Even by the lax standards of his time, his mathematics was not rigorous. He used approximations and power series in which he regularly dropped terms that were considered insignifi- cant on physical grounds.8 Laplace’s work in physics began, not with the analytic mechanics of Lagrange, but with the grubbier observation-centered type of work that d’Alembert had labeled ‘general and experimental physics’. In the 1770s Laplace collaborated with Lavoisier in an attempt to develop a chemical physics of heat.",
"Where Boscovitch and Kant presented general force laws, which attempted to make action at a distance intelligible, Laplace introduced hypotheses about forces to explain specific properties of matter." (One part of quantum mechanics: the specific.),
"He thought of the normal state of a physical body as representing an equilib- rium condition between heat, or the radiation of caloric, which tends to separate molecules, and the forces of chemical affinity, which draws molecules together." (Zeroth law of thermodynamics being a 20th-century invention at its fullest extent and against nature as being mostly non-equilibrium.),
"By 1784 he had introduced the notion (Green later introduced the term) of a potential from which force could be derived. From 1802 on considerations of short range forces were basic to Laplace’s work. This is best illustrated by the treatment of heat of elastic fluids that he developed at the close of his career in the early 1820s (Ibid., Vol. 5, pp. 113–132).", "By assuming that the gas molecules",
p.92: "are enclosed in a large sphere of arbitrary radius he is able to deduce Boyle’s law, Gay-Lussac’s law, and Dalton’s law of partial pressures. With further assumptions about the heat of particles he deduced the correct results for the velocity of sound in air (Ibid., pp. 133–145). This illustrates the type of mixed inference proper to developing physics. In this way, mechanical concepts were extended to treatments of heat, light, and electricity by Laplace, his disciples, Poisson and Biot, and his associate, Ampère. This meant sacrificing the analytic rigor of Lagrange in favor of arguments based on the physical significance accorded mathematical expressions. At the same time he came to stress the importance of experimental verification on the grounds that the conclusion were very remote from the basic assumptions (Ibid., p. 469).", "An Energetic Physics
The goal of unifying physics on the foundation of atomistic mechanism shaped the conceptual structure of much of nineteenth century physics (See Harman 1982a, p. 106). We will consider two stages of this. The attempt to fit thermodynamics into a mechanical picture and the later struggle to fit electrodynamics into this frame- work. The caloric theory of heat, in the form developed by Lavoisier and Laplace provided a theoretical explanation for the thermal phenomena previously listed.9 The theory presuppose a distinction between the material atoms which constitute ordinary bodies and the much smaller, probably weightless, caloric atoms.",
p.238: "In the human realm, realism is not a theory. It is a basic feature of the framework that makes theories about reality possible."
p.241: "Here, fortunately, Steven Weinberg’s 2008 Cosmology comes to the rescue. This was written after Weinberg had completed his authoritative three volume treatise on quantum field theory and an earlier treatise on general relativity. His professed aim is to present a self-contained account that relies as much as possible on physical argu- ments and analytic mathematics (See p. vii, 257). When appropriate he compares his results to computer calculations. It is a definitive treatise, not a popularization. Implementing this program requires a detailed knowledge of current astronomical research, a mastery of all the main branches of physics, and an incredible amount of calculation. Very few physicists, and no philosophers, meet these exacting stan- dards.";
2026.02.01/link.springer .com/article/10.1007/s10999-025-09818-9 : "evolution of classical mechanics into more general formulations, namely Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics, which are central to modern physics. These energy-based approaches provide a more flexible framework to analyze complex systems and serve as a bridge to advanced topics such as statistical mechanics and quantum mechanics. Finally, we examine the limitations of Newtonian mechanics in problems involving relativistic effects, quantum phenomena, and non-inertial reference frame."
Classical physics Vs quantum physics:a

Essentialism-note:v
2025.01.14/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Essentialism : "An essence characterizes a substance or a form, in the sense of the forms and ideas in Platonic idealism. It is permanent, unalterable, and eternal, and is present in every possible world. Classical humanism has an essentialist conception of the human, in its endorsement of the notion of an eternal and unchangeable human nature. This has been criticized by Kierkegaard, Marx, Heidegger, Sartre, Badiou and many other existential, materialist and anti-humanist thinkers. Essentialism, in its broadest sense, is any philosophy that acknowledges the primacy of essence. Unlike existentialism, which posits "being" as the fundamental reality, the essentialist ontology must be approached from a metaphysical perspective. Empirical knowledge is developed from experience of a relational universe whose components and attributes are defined and measured in terms of intellectually constructed laws. Thus, for the scientist, reality is explored as an evolutionary system of diverse entities, the order of which is determined by the principle of causality.[citation needed]" (The postmodernists rejects essentialism. It's more empirical and already an unification between Aristotelian widespread beliefs and Newtonian empiricism.)
Essentialism-note:a

Renaissance-note:v
2026.02.12/academia .edu/36181382/Book_Review_Michael_Tavuzzi_in_Journal_of_Ecclesiastical_History_Vol_69_1_January_2018_155_157_pdf?rcc=same_author&rcpos=0&rcpg=0 : p.1: "supposedly saintly friars of the Franciscan and Dominican observant movements and the alleged followers of Satan, the putative witches accused of maleficent misdeeds. Yet the reality was probably far more prosaic and even dismal, the opposites being credulous friars resorting to startling sermon material and their prey, impoverished women who, upon becoming too old to live off prostitution, tried to eke out a miserable living by uttering curses, casting spells and concocting philtres. However, at least among the more learned friars, the issue of the reality or otherwise of witchcraft in its newly postu- lated, radically diabolic version was the subject of robust intellectual debate.",
p.3: "Ippolito Chizzola – a Lateran regular canon preacher in his early life influenced by dissenting ideas, but later a staunch supporter of the Counter-Reformation" (First post-modern, then pre-modern.)
Renaissance-note:a

18th century-narrative:v
2025.03.21/books .google .com/ngrams/graph?content=Social+influencer&year_start=1500&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=50&case_insensitive=false : 1944 > ;
2025.03.21/books .google .com/ngrams/graph?content=Opinion+leader&year_start=1500&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=50 : 1900 0.0000000001% ; 2025.03.20/books .google .com/ngrams/graph?content=Social+media&year_start=1500&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=50 : 1794 0.0000000070% ; 2025.05.03/jstor .org/stable/jj .8501175 : "1733 Dufay was 35, energetic, brilliant, thorough and orderly, already a leading member of the Paris Academy of Science, independently wealthy, equally at home among academicians, ministers and high society, open and good-humored, with a taste for Italian burlesques and the satires of Swift.¹ He proved the ideal successor to Gray and Hauksbee."; 2025.05.03/amazon .com/English-Virtuoso-Medicine-Antiquarianism-Empiricism/dp/0226315878 : "English virtuosi in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries were erudite individuals with solid grounding in the classics, deep appreciation for the arts, and sincere curiosity about the natural world." (Kinda contradicting Edward MacKinnon's "Interpreting Physics"-book about classical physicists being excluded from Oxford and Cambridge, who teaches Latin, Greek, or classical literature yet even the non-conformists spoke scholastic latin at correspondence, then more popularized latin, then French. It depends on language-dominance at that time. Physics transcended language. perhaps the English virtuosi knew the classics before and or without any school.) "Reestablishing their broad historical significance, The English Virtuoso situates this polymathic group at the rich intersection of the period’s art, medicine, and antiquarianism.", "At the heart of this profoundly interdisciplinary study lies the Royal Society of London for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge, which from its founding in 1660 served as the major professional organization for London’s leading physicians, many of them prominent virtuosi."( Now it's more contradicting with Interpreting Physics-book.) "Craig Ashley Hanson reveals that a vital art audience emerged from the Royal Society—whose members assembled many of the period’s most important nonaristocratic collections—a century before most accounts date the establishment of an institutional base for the arts in England."; 2025.05.12/mlwi.magix .net/science.htm : Simply because scientists had grasped the notion of inanimate bodies, many intellectuals thought that virtually everything, including society, could be understood and delineated logically and mathematically. This amounted to an overestimation of the findings of Newton and Laplace. For the first time mankind could exactly predict a tiny part of reality.... the direction where cerebral energy still goes: only that which is quantifiable is worthy of intellectual interest.... Such notions derive from an age when the human unconscious permeated the outer world. Science rose only when we learned to separate the mythological from the empirical.;
18th century-narrative:a

18th century-note:v
2025.03.02: 2021-06-10: The Medieval Historian: Unit 2: Europe on the Threshold of Modernity: 0:50 I explain why coffee is the most important of all time besides perhaps beer. Without coffee in my opinion, we would not have the modern world. Image of early modern Coffee shops.
11:59 Enlightenment c. 1650--1789 If the scientific revolution was challenging old established authorities & conclusions about the universe in the natural world, then the enlightenment challenged the established ideas about the social world. It can't really be overstated how important the enlightenment is to the modern world. Our concepts of representative democracy, human rights, equality & government's role all come out of the enlightenment. 12:24 The very way we think, learn & values we hold dear in the western world are all products of the enlightenment.
12:34 During the 18th century, these new ideas would have profound implications almost immediately. American & French Revolution were directly inspired by enlightenment ideals & their leaders in many cases enlightenment thinkers. French Revolution (1789-1815),
12:50 And yet this was all happening during a time in which governments were incredibly restrictive & oppressive. Louis XIV "sun king" embodied concept of absolute ruler.
13:03 Louis XIV is depicted in Roman armor & portrait as classical warrior, a hero if you will. Sort of royal propaganda. Louis XIV was called "sun king" because since all power emanates from the sun & he was what we would call an absolute ruler with absolute power & power he definitely had.
13:30 One way to understand how powerful Louis XIV was is to look at his palace of Versailles as a absolutely humongous sprawling complex being gorgeous everywhere you go built during his reign.
13:55 Story goes that Louis XIV wanted a new palace. He didn't liked his dingy old medieval castle palace in Paris & he wanted a little bit nicer that was closer to his hunting grounds.
14:09 Problem was that it was a swamp & his ministers advised him saying sire you can't build a palace there. It's terrible land.
14:27 At incredible expense requiring some of the best architectural minds & engineers of the day, they achieved the seemingly impossible and built this massive complex in a swamp & theres no greater testament to Louis XIV's power than the very existence of Versailles.
14:50 Lavish & ornate display of wealth & power embedded into every part of the palace of Versailles.
15:44  "By the 18th century, we see the rise of absolute kings", yet according to study-essay and peak enlightened absolutism-articles considering that "for the people" is closer to parliamentary monarchy and therefore demoting absoluteness, nominal god-representing from King James's, god's-chosen-guy absolutism coming to after peak after Louis XIV died in 1714, which most historians in Wikipedia 2024 agrees begun enlightenment, and later enlightened absolutism, which Napoleon Bonaparte represented the after the enlightenment, points that 18th was late stage absolutist period and declining.
16:41 The enlightenment is applying the principles of Scientific Revolution to political & social thought. It's really directly tied to this. In many cases, it's the same people who are contributing to the scientific revolution are also contributing to the enlightenment.
17:04 Philosophers really we're just people who were interested in intellectual ideas. They debate one day about the heliocentric universe and the next day talking about whether we need kings or not.
17:16 Critical spirit & optimism about human progress.
17:19 Throughout scientific revolution is this critical, questioning spirit & above all a real optimism about where we're going.
17:30 Perfect Society where everyone is equal & everything is just hunky-dory.
17:35 As we already said, France was the center of enlightenment. It's the philosophies in France who set the standard & really export these ideas throughout the rest of Europe. (Conflict with Charles Murray's claim that Voltaire after being in London, spread Newtonism beyond currently 2 in Paris.
17:48 I had mentioned as well, there a bit of mixed reactions from rulers at least initially. Some rulers across Europe embraced aspects of the enlightenment to do with inefficiencies in government & even law equality as long as it keeps them still in power. Other rulers will deeply distrust the enlightenment & probably from a purely pragmatic view they were the smart ones because the enlightenment obviously will lead to the downfall of absolute rulers just about everywhere. (So how can 18th century be the rise of absolute kings? Voltaire commented to Louis XV that it's the first time the monarch wasn't absolute after the nobles and clergy rejecting Louis XV's tax reform or so.)
18:34 John Locke (1632-1704) John Locke us actually not French. I just spend all the time telling you that France is at the center of it all but I suppose John Locke, you know he's the one who starts it. Also, maybe we shouldn't be thinking France is the end on be all.
18:48 John Locke influenced nearly all later philosophers. Originator of the concept of the "social contract". Revolutionary at his time, simple idea that Kings don't rule by divine  right. They're not ruling because god appointed them into that position but rather they rule with a bargain of sorts with the people.
19:09 Bargain posits that Kings have responsibilities to maintain the peace of the realm, to make sure the people are safe, a fair & equitable justice system to people. People have responsibilities too to be good citizens, follow the law, not get into trouble, if needed, maybe even to come in and protect the Kingdom by army during war
19:40 Balance between people & the ruler.
20:00 Louis XIV said: I am the state. (No legitimate evidence that Louis XIV said it.)
20:21 If one side is not fulfilling their end of the bargain, then the other side could be justified in breaking that contact & in this case overthrowing a king. That's the part John Locke eventually lead to revolution. John Locke is also called classical liberalism's dad.
20:50 Second half of 19th century becomes the major & one of competing force in politics.
21:23 18th-19th century liberalism is John Locke's ideas such as limited government power. Government should only be empowered to the degree that the law allows them to be & only so they can fulfill the end of their social contract & thus under liberalism, individuals have rights.
21:56 John Locke's idea will basically run under much of the 18th century enlightenment thinking define toy will continue to be a profound force in 19th century as well.
22:10 Voltaire (1694-1778) is probably the most famous person when it comes to enlightenment. (Friend of Diderot. Build good relationships with Frederick the Great the most at 1740s-1750s & other enlightened absolutists.) When people talk about the enlightenment, they usually use Voltaire as an example. He was famous in his own time.
22:20 When Voltaire wasn't running away from rulers who wanted to imprison him for his ideas, he was traveling all around Europe and hobnobbing with the rich and famous & spreading these crazy new ideas of the enlightenment.
22:39 Of course Voltaire was not his real name. He was born in François-Marie Arouet & that was how his mother called him.
22:47 Like Zendaya or Madonna or a drake, he took on a pen name.
22:55 He also was from new sort of wealthy upper middle-class which so many of the enlightenment thinkers come from & he had lots of writing but his main ideas that we take away from are concepts like the freedom of religion. It was revolutionary. Early advocate of freedom of religion, expression, & separation of church & state.
23:18 Most people thought that it was detrimental to a society living together who believed in different things with respect to religion to lead to constant strife & it was better to separate people & certainly it's the best for a state to enforce 1 religion. Generally thought to be a good thing. Voltaire wanted freedom of religion where everyone can worship as they choose. Believed expression freedom that people should be able to say & think what they want. (Is thinking expression?). Separation of church and state in a time where there wasn't.
23:57 Rulers were religious, they often had very close relationships with the heads of the church & there's no concept that they should should be ruling sort of in a secular point of view like ruling for all people regardless of their religion. Freedom of religion follows that they have to have a state that is neutral arbitrator to religion as well. These ideas are fundamental to all western democracies today: speech, religious freedom, & church-state-separation.
24:32 Matesks Montesquieu (1689-1755)
24:39 Because it's a long name, it's easier to call him Mateska. It's not a pen name.
24:45 He is one of few people of enlightenment who is actually part of nobility. Not all from upper middle class but there were some people (or few) from old noble families.
24:55 Mateska's great contribution to the concepts of enlightenment was 3-part-separation of powers of government. A lot of western democracies essentially are modeled under this system particularly the USA, which was build on enlightenment ideals. American Revolution comes from it and people organizing it  were mostly enlightened thinkers. The idea: We don't have all power invested in one perrson, even if that person is elected, we don't invest all power in one person. (His idea came from misunderstanding how the British system worked 18th century.) Instead we separate those powers in 3 groups, each with checks and balances on the other. That way, 1 group can't become corrupt or if they do, the other 2 will have a check on their power. Under Mateska's conception: USA: Executive (president say), Legislative (congress), Judicial (supreme court systems) technically equal. Legislative could impeach president and remove power. Executive: any law that the legislative passes has to be signed by the executive president, which they can veto. Judicial interpret laws & are also the ones calling goals and strikes in terms of adherence to the constitution. Similar system in Canada. Only difference in Canada and other parliamentary democracies l, it gets a little bit confusing because our executive doesn't really have much power. Our executive is not the prime minister but rather the Queen, which she doesn't have power. Real power is invested in the prime minister, who is a part of legislative group so its a little bit more complicated in Canada which is why some people argued that under parliamentary systems like Britain, Canada, Australia, the prime minister actually has more power relatively speaking than the president does under a republican system like in the United States.
27:41 Adam Smith (1723-1790) He was Scottish. Father of modern economics. His main contribution was just thinking about economics in general. Scottish moral philosopher. Economics is of course study of monetary policy at a macro-level so at the level of countries & this was not something that people really thought about. They thought of you know business as very local or they thought about taxes but they didn't really think about how everything connects to one another. (Rise of social science and concept of irrational "Theory Of Everything" manifesting through Hamiltonian Mechanics?) His basic philosophy was laissez-faire ("let it go")economics which is sometimes called the invisible hands.
28:21 Adam Smith believed that the best way for an economy to be successful for as many people as possible to be benefiting from the economy, government needs to stay out if his way. He was texting to mercantilism, which was the norm at the time. The countries very strictly controlled their economics. They said who you could trade with, the colonies could only trade with mother countries et cetera. 
29:05 His main book: "The Wealth Of Nations" he argued that nations essentially would do best if they are existing on a free & open market, thus some nations will be better at certain things than others, naturally we will see specialization, this will result in the lowest prices for things, most market efficiency & ultimately the most amount of people will be wealthy. Plenty disagreed.
29:35 Adam Smith's ideas through are still held as the essential beginning of economics as whole discipline.
29:45 Final person I want to talk about is Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). Incredibly important because she has huge influence on French Revolution. His ideas were put directly into play in the French Revolution. (USA ideas were from Thomas Jefferson being inspired by John Locke's classical liberalism. Those 2 ideas wrote the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizens?) He himself didn't saw French Revolution. The Medieval Historian suspect that he might be horrified at deeds done using the same terms he cone up with. (Loopholes and vague terms from French constitution exploited according to a professional-looking YT-Video.) 2 of his main works were the origin on inequality & on social contract. His main idea was the concept called the general will. He sort of developed further from John Locke's social contract idea, instead actually said that kings only rule at the behest of the general will.
30:28 That means that the people essentially allow the King and can withdraw that permission. Idea of almost like majority rules essentially so it's the collective people's voice. During the French Revolution, the general will will do terrible things such as guillotine by protocol-socialist Jacobins. Compel people to fight in army (Like The Medieval Historian attributed to John Locke's view.), other nasty things in French Revolution & they called it general will.
31:05 Now I want to make an argument that coffee is most important substance in modern world & in fact the modern world wouldn't exist without coffee. ... Pause & go make yourself a really nice cup of coffee. Don't go to Starbucks because social distancing is still applied and closed shops.
31:35 Coffee is an old world crop with the Colombian exchange.
New products came from America to Europe they hadn't known things like chocolate, tomatoes, potatoes before.
We believe the natural coffee plant originated in Africa probably around Kenya & that's probably where it was domesticated for the first time. Maybe around 11th century or so. There's a legend how coffee was discovered apparently a shepherd was attending to his flock of goats or sheep, there's different versions of the story, & he noticed that when they ate the red berries of this particular plant, they got very excited & danced around. So the shepherd then tried it himself. Thus coffee was born.
32:41 So when coffee houses begin to appear in Europe in 16th century, it's not just coffee that's coming to Europe first time, there are also 2 other new drinks from European's view: 3 new stimulants sort of spreading into Europe at the same time there's coffee, then tea of course coming from Asia. It was 1000 years old but new to Europeans & it begins to come into Europe same time.
33:09 Another drink if I say drink is chocolate. For the vast majority of chocolate history, it was a drink, a beverage very light coffee. Cacao which is the plant from which chocolate is made contains theobromine, a related compound to caffeine. It has similar effect on human nervous system. It's not quite as strong but it is a stimulant beverage so before it was turned into a solid and sweetened wit sugar, chocolate at his heart is a very bitter beverage not unlike coffee. (Correlation between Swiss people eating dark chocolate, winning novel prizes, GDP per capita with Singapore and Switzerland historically producing high correlation of geniuses at certain cities.)
33:44 They circulated through Europe & it will be coffee that will circulate it'll be coffee through that will ultimately be the most successful & be the one with the biggest influence. It's first introduced to Europe around 1500s/16th century & it came into Europe vis-a-vis the Islamic world so if we imagine coffee being domesticated on Africa sometime around the 11th century, spread into Islamic world probably in late middle ages & then Europeans would have experienced it somewhat later. It spread very quickly. Once it enters Europe, we start seeing coffee houses pop up all over the place by the mid-17th century. All major cities having several coffee houses.
34:30 Coffee House in Islamic world. Image is 16th century manuscript of men drinking coffee. Coffee was successful in Islamic world partially because it's a beverage that's not alcohol because alcohol was prohibited for most Muslims. Coffee was permitted. It was so successful that it arguably started is the reason why we started to see a greater emphasis on night prayers in some Islamic sects & here you see an image of a European coffee shop with lots of white men in white wigs enjoying their cup of joe. One thing to note is that there's no woman in this image and indeed. It's confusing whether women were allowed or not into coffee shops. Coffee houses were predominantly a male cultural phenomenon in Europe.
35:29 When coffee began to circulate in Europe, it causes a lot of controversy. People don't really know what it is. All kinds of crazy ideas. Some believed it to be an aphrodisiac, others through it caused impotence Women's petition against coffee representing to public consideration in 1674. The grand inconveniences according to their sex from the excessive use of that drawing and feebling liquor. Essentially this was an argument that women were angered of their husbands were drinking coffee and thus they weren't able to perform their husbandly duties. Maybe women were forbidden from coffee shops. Lot of scholarly thought about this. We think likely that women above a certain social standing would have not wanted to be seen in a coffee shop that would have been considered uncouth for them to appear, whereas women below a certain station, it didn't really matter but we do have some examples of even women owning coffee shops so we think that it certainly wasn't a blanket policy. For women & during modern period, tea will ultimately become a much more important drink than coffee partially because of this association with coffee being something that is an intoxicant or a dark liquors. Sometimes associated with devil.
36:55 1 thing that is under appreciated about what coffee did for Europe at that time was begin of night culture. (Most successfully practiced enlightened absolutist Napoleon Bonaparte slept only 4 hours a his younger forever?)This is a very first stimulant beverage that Europeans have  had access to. Traditionally, Europeans drank 2: water & beer. They drank a lot of beer. Beer during the Middle Ages was considered safer than water & in many cases for most Europeans it was because the process of making beer kill microbes & nastiness occurring from water out of stream running through London, which is gross for The Medieval Historian. They drank for breakfast, lunch, dinner & kids too. Now obviously the beer that they were drinking was a much weaker beer than we would have probably about 1-2%.
37:48 If you're just spending your day drinking beer, you're not going to have a scientific revolution, you're going to be, you know kind of  like:"I'm going to take it easy."
Some people argued that night culture doesn't exist in same way till coffee comes into play.
Beginning of night culture, coffee becomes controversial for another reason & that's that people are getting together in coffee shops & what are they talking about in there. (First half of 18th century: oral 2nd half of 18th: written, Book gains prestige despite controversy.)
38:26 Charles II (1630-1685) tries to shut down all coffee houses in 1675 in England. His father Charles I had his head cut off. He was nervous of talks. Problem is, the coffee houses were so popular, even his own ministers attended coffee houses. Charles II:"places where the disaffected met, and spread scandalous reports" (So does singing, newspaper-snippets, letters & travel books mentally. Coffee houses also contributed for & in enlightenment too.)
39:00 Reason why Charles II struggled to shutdown coffeehouses is because they had become a communication hub. It's in coffee houses, that you would go to hear news from abroad. (like someone narrating early 18th century newspapers & meeting garden) Coffee houses had become essentially 18th century internet (Like every medium that travels information fast. Newspapers were small, weekly and people read it together sometimes and in entire 18th century till circulation increased due Penny Press and popularity, according to Wikipedia, newspapers only started to become linear media at 19th century and rise of daily newspapers according to female Indian YT-video I think, meaning before that also looking at poet's responses to each other, that newspapers too were responsive. So does letters, & snippets.) That's what "many historians"described coffee houses, so The Medieval Historian. They were places where unregulated academic discussion & exchange of all sorts of ideas could take place & all of the major thinkers of sci. rev. & enlightenment patronized coffeehouses (And singing, just meeting & reading. Arguably reading became more significant afterwards, yet pocket books as street literature existed before & snippets as well.
40:05 According to 1 story, Newton didn't came up because an apple fell on his head [Correction: As the larger apple mass with apple-sting (would make more sense from "apple pointing to tree" in terms of writing down Newton's worldview) points to the tree attracting to mass, yet his parts of ideas would be gradually assembled anyway.], he came up with it, drinking coffee with his buddy Edmund Halley in 1684, that Edmund Halley gave Newton the initial idea for Principia in a coffee house. Halley was famous in his own right for his own contribution to the sci. rev. discovered Halley's comet.
40:39 Coffee houses eventually started to specialize in certain topics, so you would know that if you went to 1 coffee shop, you might get lectures on physics/mathematics and so on.
Marine coffeehouse which was popular in London venue for mathematic lectures. At the time, coffee houses became known as penny universities because you can go into a coffee house in Oxford or London & for paying the price of a cup of coffee, a penny, you could get education so they were becoming more and more important to the idea of modern exchange of these new themes. Coffeehouses is important to learn about science, new ideas of enlightenment & business hubs. London coffeehouses become centers of trade & commerce. Find like-minded people. Current shipping news. Jonathan's coffeehouse being there especially for business established in 1680 became super-important, expand space for everybody. He didn't had enough space. Eventually, they moved into some new digs and renamed themselves the London stock exchange in 1801. One of first real modern stock exchange.
42:41 Many years after it moved into its new digs, people still referred to it as new Jonathan's so the connection to its coffee shop origin was not completely lost.
42:52 Another important coffeehouse for business was Lloyd's coffeehouse opening on Towers Street in London, 1688 by Edmund Lloyd . (c. 1648--1713) It becomes really important & popular place for sailors, merchants, & ship owners. Lloyd catered to them with reliable shipping news.
Shipping business was "obviously" a risky business. Ships were bad. They frequently sank.
44:25 Formally became The Society of Lloyd in 1774. At end of 2018, Lloyds held £53.5 billion worth assets. Lloyds is one of biggest insurance company in world now. If you were in UK, you'd know all about Lloyds. It's a 3x big company. The very concept of insurance so when you're paying your car insurance or whatever other insurance you have, that idea began in this. All major thinkers of sci. rev. & enlightenment went to coffeehouses also Voltaire.
45:12 Voltaire used to brag that he drank 50 cups a day. The Medieval Historian don't know how that's possible. Sounds rather dangerous but that's what he said. Jean-Jacques Rousseau said:"I love that perfume. When they roast it in my entry-way, some of my neighbours close their doors but I open mine." also a big fan of coffee.
45:30 The American revolution was planned in coffeehouses. We wouldn't have the American river. British knew this, they called American coffeehouses "seminaries of sedition" that is schools where you could learn to be a revolutionary. George Washington & his crew they plan the revolution in there. Particularly 1 coffee house has the Old London Coffee House, Philadelphia. American Revolution (1775-83)
46:06 French Revolution only with coffeehouses. For many historians a demarcation point from which we now enter into the modern world. According to legend, French Revolution was launched when Camille De Mellon was having a cup of coffee in the cafe de foy on July 12 1789 & news came, that the King had fired the economic minister who everyone loved & was very popular. This was the straw that broke the camel's back. He jumped up onto his table, he kicked his coffee over & yelled: "To arms! To arms!" Everyone else ran out into the street yelling it too. The Medieval Historian state this legend as fact. 18th century equivalent to Starbucks. I hope I've convinced you just how important coffee is to the modern world.
47:06 Now there are so many social & political consequences of the enlightenment but one of the most important I think is the rise of this "public opinion"-concept. The idea that government should care about & be responsive to public opinion. It happens because there's this emergence of new reading public. More people are literate than ever before. Greater books available. Newspapers, magazines & pamphlets (Pamphlets existed 17th century and at most for political messages during American & French Revolution. He means more I think or as norm.) Societal shift because enlightenment.
47:55 Few rulers who were not entirely hostile to the concepts of enlightenment. "Enlightened" monarchy. Idea that ruler takes enlightenment ideas and allowed society to change beneath them but they themselves remained in power. Frederick the Great was receptive, called himself "First servant of the State". That's sounds a lot of John Locke's social contract concept. Some leaders respond to ideas of enlightenment as long as they stay in full power, you see them a little bit of nod to enlightenment. Despot is someone who's all-powerful. En. despot is a slightly nicer version of a despot.
Catherine the Great
49:00 She wrote an enlightenment-inspired book called Instruction or /s. She argued that law should be supreme, not necessarily the leader. People should be equal to a degree underneath the leader, which remain in power. Catherine was interested in other en. ideas about efficient and originating governments to be more modern in many aspects. Russia still had serfdom. Whole case study of irony I suppose. (She talked with Diderot, financed his library. Diderot believed in enlightened absolutism in 1751, that separation between aristocracy and upper middle class? Europeans & Diderot exotize Russia meanwhile Russia doesn't. Catherine put large tables &!dress herself black & blue because Diderot treated females like they need help.) Peter the Great inspired by some ideas of enlightenment. Same time old archaic legal structures such as serfdom continuing at same time.
50:10 Sci. rev. & enlightenment represented a fundamental shift in the European worldview.
Growing Enlightenment criticism undermined Absolutist power – especially in France.
The seeds set for a century of revolution in the Western world.
50:29 French Revolution and the birth of the modern world.
; Rosenthal Video: Louis XIV never said: "I am the state." He said:"I die, but the state remains.";
Rosenthal Video: Oswald Sprengler being first at taking perspective outside Europe and talks about decline of West. He was reactionary. Victoria 2 seems to be formed by it.; 2025.03.02/ enotes .com/topics/vittorio-alfieri/criticism/introduction : "Alfieri instead valued forms of government that were based on the freedom of a country's people and felt this was a structure absent in Europe, with the exception of England."; YT:2025.03.16: 2024-12-17: "History Talks: Queen's University": A Radical Reformer in Old Regime France: Political Thought of the Marquis d'Argenson | Dr. Jainchill : 7:00 Marquis is underrated. Also in France more than they should. 1968 USA & 2004 France as non-monograph dissertation wrote handful articles about mentioning/- his thought. 7:17 He was widely praised in the 18th century as an important political thinker by Rousseau, Voltaire, Condorcet & many others. 7:30 His most important work "Considérations sur le Gouvernement Ancien et Présent de la France." was composed in 1730s & began to circulate in manuscript in 1739 & was then poisly published in 1764 after Rousseau cited the manuscript 4x in the Social Contract. No other work was cited as frequently as in the Social Contract.; 2025.03.16/gallica.bnf .fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k80094s/f5.item : Bing-translation: "This work, composed more than forty years ago, was first printed in Amsterdam by Marc-Michel Rey, in 1764, several years after the death of its author."; 2025.03.22: Heimler's History: 18th Century CULTURE & ARTS [AP Euro Review—Unit 4 Topic 5]: 0:00 You know what's weird, that your parents have their own bedroom or that you have your own bedroom, that you have an opinion about the way things are in the world like we all have a public opinion, that you invest at least Peary of your identity into things that you buy & the clothes that you wear. It wasn't always like that. 0:29 Middle & Upper class had more disposable income than ever before. The result was increased demand for consumer goods that were being manufactured all over Europe & this became known as the consumer revolution. Buying not because they necessarily need them but because they wanted. These goods include porcelain dishes & cotton & linens for home decor & mirrors. Because goods were becoming more affordable, the middle class could purchase some of the goods that were previously only reserved for the upper class. This led to people increasingly identifying themselves not merely by their religious affiliation or regional residence, but by the things they brought. New concern for privacy. Prior to consumer revolution, houses were smaller & simpler with only a few rooms in the house each room served multiple purposes. Most people though-out the Middle Ages lived in one room & the whole family slept together in the same bed.
1:42 New kinds of rooms such as Boudoir. This is the room specifically designed for the bedroom wife of the house to be apart from her husband either alone or entertaining other women. 3rd effect of consumer revolution was new venues for leisure activities. For example, people gathered together in coffeehouses thanks to the Colombian Exchange making coffee more popular in Europe. In contrast to taverns where he got sauced up and sang kid songs, coffeehouses were open to men of all classes & the emphasis was on discussing the revolutionary ideas of the day. Especially in urban areas, we can witness the rise of spectator sports. Some of the most popular were blood sports, which emphasized blood & some of more popular venues hosted bull baiting & cockfight.
2:17 Subset of consumer revolution was the reading revolution. As literacy continued to spread during this period thanks to new efforts to educate children & the abundance of printed materials made available by the printing press (which the news-form became a linear mass media as more people read in 1800.), more people began to read. Amount of books and kinds as well. (1st half: more repetitive, fewer books with more readers at one, 2nd: reverse)
2:33 In France the number of religious devotional books began to decrease in books on history, law & science & the arts began to increase rapidly.(Political scandals & crimes was most popular. Voltaire & Rousseau gain most readers especially lower class at late 18th century. Public French bibliotheca.) these reading materials came in all forms like newspapers, periodicals, pamphlets (mostly for political purposes especially in American & French Revolution. Biggest individual leaker & anonymous Lady Whistleblow uses many diverse reading medias to communicate.) Wildly popular Encyclopedia by Denise/Denis Diderot (1st in 1751. With gaps filled in humorous way by Denis Diderot and maybe others. Louis XVI read it. Contains political messages which the regulators ignored. Spread though loopholes and Switzerland.), 2:49 With all these new ideas floating around & more people exploring ideas outside the bounds of the Bible & religious devotional literature, censorship (*Ineffective pre-publication censorship especially in Holy Roman Empire. France & Span formalized it in early 18th century. Profit, curiosity & censors': inefficiency led to freer press.) increased to keep them at bay (mainly the censors were religious). Catholic Church sanctioned Diderot's encyclopedia for it's brazen questioning of religious authority. Despite censorship, people read more than ever.
3:08 Arts Revolution: Emphases from the celebration of religious themes & royal power of kings to an emphasis on private life and public good. Until about 1750, art in the Baroque style promoted religious feeling. It was employed by monarchs to illustrate state power. Monarchs embraces baroque art & paid for it because it was ostentatious & made them look powerful. In the church to did so as well. Gian Lorenzo Benini's magnificent piazzas & how he designed ornate chapels for the renovation of Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome. Composer Johann Sebastian Bach who wrote many of his compositions to be performed in a Royal Court or high church service. So all these artists are applying their trade in service of the church & Monarch, but in the 18th century, the nature & subject matter of art shifted from state & religious themes to themes that appealed to bourgeois society.
4:02 Bourgeois society is essentially the middle class & emphasizes their materialistic values. Art in 17th & early 18th century in the Baroque style was meant to all the bourgeois society whereas now in the second half of 18th century baroque art was meant to appeal to Bourgeois tastes. Good example of this shift is the work of Rembrandt. He still painted biblical scenes like the Storm on the Sea of Galilee, but compared to the biblical scenes of the high Renaissance, the former is way more down to earth. He also depicted scenes from everyday life like Slaughtered Ox. Part of this kind appealed to more common folks. Later on a new artistic movement arose known as neoclassicism. In contrast to the opulence & Grandeur of Baroque, neoclassicist artist prized simplicity & symmetry like the Pantheon in Paris build in the neoclassical style by Jacques-Germain Soufflot. Although it was commissioned by Louis XV, it is an example of neoclassicism because of simplicity & symmetry. Literature also shifted emphasis to focus on the enlightenment & commercial values of bourgeois society like Daniel Dafoe's novel Robinson Crusoe about a man shipwrecked on an island surging & thriving on his own. (*Real life equivalent hamper piepem in Island.)  Göethe's play Faust which is about a man who sells his soul to the devil in order to attain secret knowledge & abundant wealth. (Sir Isaac Newton with other alchemists/chyemist/old school chemist searched the Philosopher's Stone for creating gold & tried to shape materials. They believed in Aether instead of emptiness as universally connected medium. Although Louis XIV hand waved/accepted local custom laws, the secret committee for dark magic-prevention of the monarch amplified by subject's attempts for having power like Louis XIV to the point of violating laws, customs, religion & using dark magic made the monarch more powerful.) Main theme is human yearning for meaning increasingly felt by bourgeois society.; 2025.03.22: 2022-10-12: Heimler's History: SOCIETY & Demographics in 18th Century Europe [AP Euro Review—Unit 4 Topic 4]: 1st half 18th century: 120->140 million people, 2nd half 140->190 million, 0:55 Main reason for this population increase was a significant decline in the death rate., 0:59 If there's a decline in death rate, then that means people live longer lives. Thanks in large part to Colombian Exchange. The diets of Europeans became more varied & abundance of food available increased. This century saw improved means for transporting food like improved roads & canals & other infrastructure projects, & new means of storing food so it stayed fresh longer. Farmers saw significant increases in their crop. 1:20 By 1750, the surplus food supply in Europe was at about 50 percent, which is to say Europeans had like 50% more food than they needed to stay alive. So food is helping everyone live longer, but another factor was the disappearance of the bubonic plague in Europe. It didn't go away entirely, but the last major outbreak occurred in France in 1720. With that gone, huge swaths of the population weren't being taken out by other people's nasty germs. In general, those were the 2 main factors contributing to the longer lives & decline rate in Europe. 1:59 On average, families had about 5 children during the child bearing year. Well it seems like it would contribute to the increasing population during this period. Not so much. First, that 5 children per family number only accounts for women who were married. In this period, 40-60% of women in childbearing years remained single. So about half of population. 2nd reason/point is that in places like Britain & France, especially in the upper classes, birth control methods were increasingly being used to limit the number of children born, from about 5 on average down to 2.
2:30 Single women having a baby born out of wedlock was an illegitimate child. So illegitimste births definitely increased during this period. By 1800 Germany, full 10% of births were illegitimate. While this realty may have contributed some to the population growth, it was not enough to offset the decline in the birth rate. Therefore, the real cause of the population explosion was longer life expectancy.
2:55 Agricultural revolution. In 17th century, agriculture was significantly disrupted by weather events, low-productivity agricultural practices & small landholdings. Little Ice Age from 16th to 19th century. 17th century was the colder period. In 17th century, innovations like the two field/three field systems were able to keep pace with the growing population but now the population was increasing beyond the capacity of those systems. 3rd, in the 17th century, much of the farmland available for cultivation was contained in small plots owned by individuals. 18th century agricultural revolution, which historians argues if that happened, solves all these problems.
4:03 2 field/3 field system was abandoned. Now it's discovered that planting other nitrogen-rich crops like Clover could replenish the soil. Those clover-fields provided more grazing land for livestock. More livestock = more meat available. Particularly 2nd half of the 18th century, crop yields increased significantly during the 18th century. This happened to be one of the warmer periods of the little ice age. So potato & maize crops thanks to Colombian exchange yielded far more than they previously did & that was especially significant for the lower class. III. More land came under cultivation during this time. New farming techniques & technologies like Jethro Tull's sees drill worked best on larger commercial farms & so in this period we're going to witness the increasing commercialization of farms. Therefore small farmers were forced to consolidate their land into larger commercial farms because they couldn't compete. The most notorious effort was the enclosure acts in England, which gave League justification to the large-scale land seizure.
5:00 As Europeans in the upper classes had children during this time, societal attitudes towards children began to change. Now the prevailing attitude before this is that children were just miniature adults but thanks to the influence of the enlightenment though, childhood became a distinct developmental state & one of the most significant folks to help foster this change was Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his little book called Emil. His goal in his book was to promote the education of children because Rousseau believed in the social contract which argued that citizens were responsible for governing themselves, Rousseau argued that such a weighty responsibility required the dedicated education of children. Therefore in part because of Rousseau's influence, childhood became at least in the minds of the elite a distinct phase of development that needed nurture & attention. Now that was not the case with the working class. In their family economies whether Urban or rural, children were needed for the survival of the family. Therefore children worked right alongside their parents on the farms or in the cottage industry or at their parents trade.
5:50 Nuclear Family which is to say parents & children & not the entire extended family was the growing norm and had seen since the Middle Ages. That meant once men & women got married, they established their households apart from their parents. However to do so required no small amount of money, & therefore, men & women married later in life, which is to say in their mid to late twenties. That's pretty late when you consider that the expected lifespan of an European back then was like 50.
6:14 Migration in the 18th century. Partially of the technological advances like the steel plow & the Sea drill, fewer workers were required to work on farms. Therefore in order to find work, many rural folks moved to the city. A process known as urbanization. But as this began to occur on a large-scale, cities were crushed by the onslaught of people streaming in & that created problems. Less housing so tenement housing was created. They were hastily constructed apartment buildings, which had rooms that workers could rent for a very low price. They were poorly ventilated which means Airborne diseases like tuberculosis spread rapidly. There was no indoor plumbing which means that people had to take their waste & throw it out the window onto the street. So needless to say, the cities were stanky & profoundly unsanitary. With all these working poor crowding into the cities, other urban residents were faced with the problems of poverty like crime & prostitution. In order to address these problems, authorities passed laws meant to eradicate that. A good example is England's Vagrancy Act in 1822 to crack down prostitution.; 2025.03.22 2019-03-07: Event Horizon: Life in the 18th Century with Jon Townsend: I pick 18th century because of how much it reflects to today's world. 5:45 Something like tomato or corn would have been known in Europe to some in early 1500s but they didn't used it till 1800s. Higher voice: Definitely in the case of something like tomatoes. Corns had to be introduced & used almost immediately for survival reasons. They could not get wheat, barley & different grains like that to grow nearly as well as corn. Folks at Plymouth & Massachusetts starved 1st year unless they're eating corn. These other items specifically something like tomatoes, those get introduced & used immediately & used in Italy, France & Spain. Certainly takes the English a lot longer (like Zagroscope as the 18th century VR-gloves) to decide that that's terribly at a bowl. Different reason why they thought they weren't edible but they're part of nightshade group. 7:35 North America is a complex environment to generalize. French and Spanish areas used tomatoes. Deep: Very "cultural" at that time due lack of communication. Today we have a much more interconnected culture so we can share foods much faster, leading to this sort of culture of accepting new foods easier. 8:30 Dr. Alexander Hamilton's travel at his diary from 1740s. He travels out of Maryland into northern colonies. They really treated him almost like a complete foreigner. He gets asked very strange & pertinent questions. Hamilton thought that their food has too much garlic. 9:15 It was more of a medicinal thing whereas in other parts of Europe that was a standard food. 9:55 Sometimes they're useful, other times you're only getting a very high-level slice of society because people who write journals are high society. 13:06 Ever-present egg dependency we still use today for almost everything like in Fried Chicken from 1720s., 15:52 Small young carrots in 18th century has to be as tiff as wood because of huge boiling time. Necessity, seasonality & storage concerns. They will bury potatoes and things like that in the ground to try keep them below the frost line & so that they would have something.
18:02 18th century farmer's life. They are getting up before the sun comes up. Working in field right away several hours. Breakfast & then work continues. Peak season is working continuously. In other, easier seasons, they don't have to work continuously. They had other jobs to do. So they're working all the time. They reported that they had a good life, we're used to that, weren't bored & had fun things to do. Deep: They had a lot less distraction too. They didn't had cell phones. To them, entertainment would be sitting around & enjoying the family or reading a big book, especially in the 19th century where people were writing high volume books (Early 18th century man in USA tried to recover paper-page's texts by dunking in water. It got destroyed & even a historian remarked it with disbelief.) Farmer's breakfast was toast, eggs & bacon., 19:40 Higher: Breakfasts are different. Some will have a cup of chocolate as breakfast or something 2x very simple just tea. Or even just dry bread. So many differences between regions & in economic status that it's almost difficult to pinpoint into these people. That's why journals & different items can be nice because they point to these what it's like for that kind of specific person. Dutch still had the expression "pepper-expensive" till this day because black pepper were expensive up until a certain point of time., 21:33 Higher: At least in English cookery books in the time period, the number of spices are very contracted compared to what we use today. They're almost always the same thing 2x over again. You're gonna see salt, pepper, lemon, lemon zest in there for flavoring. One of the most frequently recipe showing up hat we don't use the same way in 2019 at all is nutmeg. That's what a channel is almost all about nutmeg. They used it in everything all the time in sweet or savory & so on. I am not sure of the exact reason why that is. Part of it os because nutmeg was expensive & you're showing off by using something like nutmeg. It's more subtle, earthy. We do see things like cayenne pepper popping up. We don't have this mass number of strand spices that we might use today. They sometimes will show up in herb bundles cells just say toss in sweet herbs, toss in savory herbs. We'll see those in many receipts but the big strange thing that pops out is nutmeg. I don't know why it is. Deeper: You don't really see mace used anymore. Nutmeg is I guess a holiday herb at this point. You might put it in certain thing but don't see it too often. 
23:34 Higher: Chocolate was 2x very prevalent as a breakfast drink in that whole 18th century time. Reference to coffeehouse serving chocolate on same level as maybe tea & surely coffee. Almost exactly the same sort of popularity as those items. Quite often referenced as a breakfast drink. Not as probably heavily milked as hot chocolate as we might think. That was highly sweetened & had a lot of milk in it but was just plain chocolate drink with hot water & for many people, that was breakfast. Chocolate was very popular. < 6y: @thatdutchguy28...: Hey, speak for yourselves. We Dutch had lost if not all of these herbs and spices in our daily life from 16th & 17th century. Some even in 15th century. With "Europe"you mean British & few Eastern European countries. Spanish, Portuguese, French & Dutch Empires via trade with Dutch & few German Kingdoms we tellre way ahead of these guys on food & spices they knew & used on an almost daily basis., 2 months: @djdrack4681: "DIY or Die" philosophy of earlier & 18th/19th century & how it'll be necessary in the early centuries of colonizing space/our solar system (later interstellar colonization). On the 'frontier', you have to be self-sufficient & survive. 25% chance to get trade/helped by others (*like Spanish Reconquista), but survival is entirely dependent on what you do. Recycling more than in calmed situation at earth because resource scarcity.; 2025.04.06/ The Nette Perspective: Day in a life Aristocracy: 0:00 Average 1750 French aristocracy. Breakfast and dressing were for meetings. Men do politics, estate management & court position through favor. Women are housekeepers, supervise children by visiting nursery where there's a tutor & extend social ties/networks for their incomes. 2:50 Earlier dinner time. dinner moved during the 18th century., 2:55 In France, dinner tended to be in noon. This will last several hours especially when entertaining. If the aristocrat doesn't host dinner, they hope to be invited. Neither hosting nor attending is a wasted opportunity. The night and evening has been devoted to entertainments such as attending a theatre and opera. Perhaps  hosting or attending a salon for discussion of literature, politics & society in general. A ball. 3:49 With these 2 activities, suppers would usually be held during our after. Also an option to go to the court of Versailles, which has a timetable of activities. They expect same  activities every evening. Tuesday: card playing Wednesday: a ball.  This continues during the lifetime of the court. Versailles for leisure or seeing King as he dives publicly or any members of royal family before returning to Paris and retiring to bed often after a period of private prayer. 4:44 They generally go to bed in midnight or in the early hours of the morning. This was a very quick run-through of their life.; 2025.04.06/ 2023-10-25: PastTimeTravlers: Step into the Past: A Time Travel Journey to 1750 - Explore the Daily Life of a Castle Servant: 0:01 1759, slavery reached its peak in the British coloniess and other world-parts. Although less widespread than elsewhere, there were also slaves & indentured servants in Britain. It's believed that within an average estate, servants could be >600 performing many duties. 0:24 18th century expanded British Empire massively acquiring territories & establishing colonies in Africa, Caribbean, North America, India & others. Most of slaves acquired by these conquests remained in these colonies but some were send to England where they were put to work in residences & estates of the British aristocracy. Slaves were considered a symbol of status & prosperity for their owners. They were primary engaged alongside homegrown servants in domestic duties including cleaning, cooking & personal assistance for their masters. Servant's intense workday began 5 in the morning & ended around midnight. First task was cleaning property before owners woke up. If one is too late, they will be punished. 2:00 Slaves speaks midnight as well. Free hours only every 2 weeks at Sunday. 3:25 Average maid's food & lodging were very poor-quality. Wet nurses had it better as they were in charge of caring for their Master's children, they occupied a relatively high position amongst their peers since it was essential for a wet nurse to be in good health & produce plenty of nutritious milk. She was provided with more sufficient food. She also lived close to the Master's family. Sometimes even sharing a child's room. Usually, wet nurses were married women, often farmer's wives, who were hired after they had their own children. Only in cases of extreme need could single moms who recently gave birth become wet nurses be employed. Children developed closer relationships with their wet nurses than with their own biological mother. Problems. If the offspring resisted, it was the wet nurse who gets punished to do agricultural work in order to sever any type of connection.
4:40 Working as a cook servant was one of most distinguished & respected job.
5:15 In general, servitude was hard. It's about shedding your life to serve your masters.; 2025.04.06/ Miacedemy Learning Channel: The World in 1750 - World History: Peter the Great charged Russian subjects a "beard tax". Russia go more European meanwhile expanded eastwards. Qing, Indian subcontinent & Mungal Empire were most successful economies with trade of silk and porcelain. (Britain, Qing & Mungal Empire opining trade internationally 1st time in 1750) Britain's influence increased to India.; 2025.04.17/en.wikipedia .org/Common-Sense : "Since the Age of Enlightenment the term "common sense" has
frequently been used for rhetorical effect, sometimes pejorative, and
sometimes appealed to positively, as an authority. It can be negatively
equated to vulgar prejudice and superstition, it is often positively
contrasted to them as a standard for good taste and as the source of the
most basic axioms needed for science and logic.[6]"; 2025.04.29/jameslindlibrary .org/wp-data/uploads/2014/07/Trohler-2000-to-improve.pdf : "second half of the 18th century there was a desire to bridge the age-old schism between the dogmatist’s and the empiricist’s way to truth."; 2025.04.29/old.reddit .com/r/askphilosophy/comments/3ahm4k/why_is_hume_regarded_as_an_empiricist_if_he/ : ange1obear: phil. of physics, phil. of math: 10 points: 9 yeas ago: "No one denies the existence of a priori knowledge. The fight between empiricists and rationalists is what we can have a priori knowledge about. As a hard-line empiricist, Hume thinks we can only have a priori knowledge about relations of ideas: things like mathematics or definitions. Rationalists think we can have a priori knowledge of more than that; they think that we can know things a priori about some kinds of matters of fact.", LeeHyari: Analytical philosopher: 1 points: "empiricists deny that there is such thing as the synthetic a priori, so their view is consistent. Hume's Fork exhaustively divides everything into analytic a priori and synthetic a posteriori. The early analytics (Frege, Russell, etc.) and logical empiricists of the early 20th century also rejected Kant's synthetic a priori and tried to show that mathematics was all just true by virtue of the meanings of the terms (analytic a priori)." < LeeHyori: Analytical philosopher: 0 points: ..."On the necessary versus contingent (concerning reality), the a priori versus a posteriori (concerning knowledge), and the analytic versus synthetic (concerning language), truths relating ideas (abstract) all align on one side (necessary, a priori, analytic), whereas truths on actualities (concrete) always align on the other side (contingent, a posteriori, synthetic).
Is math & logic analytic a priori or synthetic?
That's the big question! That's almost like asking, "So, is morality objective or subjective?" I've asked my philosophy of mathematics professor, and he said "I think most people nowadays would say that it is analytic." My other one said the most unsatisfying answer ever, bless him: "It depends on what you mean by analytic!"
I think that nowadays, most people would say that mathematics is analytic."..., [deleted]: 1 point: 9 years ago: "classic rational/empiricist debate was largely about the origin of ideas, as well as other issues like whether there were pure intellectual ideas or just ideas of the senses/imagination. These issues, of course, are related to questions about the justification of knowledge; if, for example, you think all our ideas come from the senses, and our senses can only see the 'outer surfaces' of things and can't penetrate into causal relations or essences or things like that, then that can have an affect on your opinion of our ability to know those things."; 2025.04.29/dummies .com/article/body-mind-spirit/philosophy/general-philosophy/philosophical-battles-empiricism-versus-rationalism-200935 : "Empiricists have always claimed that sense experience is the ultimate starting point for all our knowledge.", "classic example of an empiricist is the British philosopher John Locke (1632–1704).", "easy to see how empiricism has been able to win over many converts.", "where our beliefs ultimately do, or should, come from.  Rationalists have claimed that the ultimate starting point for all knowledge is not the senses but reason.", "rational beliefs, and the entirety of human knowledge, consists in first principles and innate concepts (concepts that we are just born having) that are somehow generated and certified by reason, along with anything logically deducible from these first principles.", "self-evident proposition has the strange property of being such that, on merely understanding what it says, and without any further checking or special evidence of any kind, we can just intellectually "see" that it is true. Examples might be such propositions as:  Any surface that is red is colored. If A is greater than B, and B is greater than C, then A is greater than C. The claim is that, once these statements are understood, it takes no further sense experience whatsoever to see that they are true.", "Rationalism has remained a seductive idea for individuals attracted to mathematics and to the beauties of unified theory, but it has never been made to work as a practical matter."; 2025.04.30/vaia .com/en-us/explanations/philosophy/classical-philosophy/empiricism : "Empiricism is a philosophical approach that emphasizes knowledge derived from sensory experience, advocating that understanding and evidence should be rooted in observable and experimental data. Key proponents like John Locke and David Hume argued that the mind begins as a blank slate, with knowledge primarily acquired through experience rather than innate ideas.", "Tabula Rasa: Often associated with John Locke, this suggests that individuals are born without prior knowledge. Sensory Experience: All knowledge originates from sensory experience. Evidence-based Understanding: Knowledge must be validated through observation and experience."  "John Locke’s concept of tabula rasa was revolutionary", "The pre-Socratic philosopher Heraclitus emphasized change and the importance of sensory experiences. Aristotle, one of the most significant figures, proposed that knowledge comes from empirical observation rather than innate ideas. The natural philosophy of the Stoics relied heavily on observation to understand natural laws.", "Empiricism in Enlightenment During the Enlightenment, Empiricism became a more clearly defined philosophy, reshaping thinking in both philosophy and science. This era was marked by an increased emphasis on rational enquiry based on evidence.", "John Locke asserted that the mind begins as a blank slate, with knowledge arising from experience. George Berkeley challenged Locke by suggesting that objects themselves do not have an independent existence without perception. David Hume further developed Empiricism by questioning causality and the existence of innate ideas, emphasizing skepticism.", "increased focus on empirical methods during the Enlightenment helped lay the groundwork for the scientific methods used today, merging empirical data with rational analysis."; 2025.04.30/philarchive .org/archive/STAPMI-4 : p.16: "Ontic Unity: a single type of object unifies physical theory.", "Nomic Unity: a single set of principles, such as a set of dynamical laws, unifies physical theory.", p.27: "around 1750, the locus for grappling with BODY moved from philosophy to rational mechanics. We explain the reasons for this watershed transition. First, we identify conceptual difficulties with three notions that philosophers had relied on—mass, contact action, and extended-body motion. Then, we argue that professional philosophers at the time failed to incorporate pertinent advances in mechanics into their accounts of BODY, opening a rift between philosophical physics and rational mechanics.", "two strands of development, one seeking nomic unity (following Lagrange), and the other ontic unity (in the physics of the Laplacian School). Work by Cauchy spawned alternatives to both: a new approach to nomic unity, by means of balance laws of force and torque; and a new approach to ontic unity, based in deformable-continuous matter.", p.29: " 18th century was a golden age for philosophical mechanics. As the century began, physics was a subdiscipline of philosophy, and its primary task was BODY. By 1800, this was no longer the case. Physics had become an independent discipline, and BODY was not its driving concern anymore. In this book, we argue that the philosophical reasons for this transformation—and thus its consequences—come into view if we analyze the century as an era of philosophical mechanics. That is, as an age of widespread, long-lasting and concerted efforts to address BODY by integrating rational mechanics with philosophical physics.", "not true that 18th century physics is “normal science,” nor that 18th century mechanics has settled foundations and is philosophically uninteresting. This is not a new point to make, yet for its significance to shine through, for it to be something we can use in our research and teach in our classrooms, we need an alternative way of framing the history, one that is different from Mach’s or Kuhn’s.
Our proposal, philosophical mechanics, is built on evidence from the books and papers of the time, and it enables us to do a wide variety of new and interesting work. Books whose philosophical importance is largely invisible under old framings (such as Du Châtelet’s Foundations of Physics and d’Alembert’s Treatise on Dynamics) come to the fore.", p.30: "broad range of first-rank physicists are seen to be doing work with philosophical import.", "From our vantage point it appears as a widely shared and long-lasting project—of integrating philosophical physics with rational mechanics."; 2025.05.01/atlassociety .org/post/benjamin-franklin-enlightenment-archetype-4 : Franklin conducted 1749 an electrical experiment., "only Franklin and his followers could explain such phenomena as the following. "; 2025.05.01/nobelprize .org/uploads/2016/04/broglie-lecture.pdf : p.1: "For a long time physicists had been wondering whether light was composed of small, rapidly moving corpuscles. This idea was put forward by the phi- losophers of antiquity and upheld by Newton in the 18th century. After Thomas Young’s discovery of interference phenomena and following the admirable work of Augustin Fresnel, the hypothesis of a granular structure of light was entirely abandoned and the wave theory unanimously adopted."; ehne .fr/en/encyclopedia/themes/humanism-enlightenment/women-in-modern-europe/between-science-philosophy-émilie-du-châtelet-a-key-figure-european-enlightenment : Châtelet encountered Maupertius & collaborated with Voltaire. "Scientific controversies and prize essay questions came to play a leading role in Enlightenment discourse and thought.", "Du Châtelet’s major work was a French translation of Newton’s Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica (so-called “Pemberton-edition” of 1726). A part was published in 1756, seven years after her death, under the direction of the mathematician Alexis-Claude Clairaut (1713-1765) with a preface written by Voltaire. The complete work appeared in 1759. It was for a long time the only translation of Newton’s Principia into French. Du Châtelet added a critical commentary": Astronomical model's history & Newton's attraction law., "It is thus both the unacknowledged face of a great scholar of the Enlightenment and an original side of the anti-ecclesiastical critical spirit of the eighteenth century that du Châtelet embodied. With her translations and publications, du Châtelet came to play a leading role in the Enlightenment movement’s discourse and thought on science, based on empiricism and rational thought and embedded with the ideal of advancement and progress."; 2025.05.01/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Émilie_du_Châtelet : "Historical evidence indicates that her work had a very significant influence on the philosophical and scientific conversations of the 1730s and 1740s – in fact, she was famous and respected by the greatest thinkers of her time.[6] Francesco Algarotti styled the dialogue of Il Newtonianismo per le dame based on conversations he observed between du Châtelet and Voltaire at Cirey."; 2025.05.01/projectvox .org/du-chatelet-1706-1749 : "As every student of eighteenth-century philosophy knows, from at least the time of the extremely popular and influential correspondence between Leibniz and the Newtonian Samuel Clarke (1717, first edition), philosophers and scholars viewed the ideas of the two discoverers of the integral and differential calculus as reflecting fundamentally opposed conceptions of nature and of the methods to be used in understanding it. It is therefore intriguing to note that Du Châtelet began to see past this opposition already in the late 1730s, indicating in her magnum opus that she intended to adopt methods and ideas from each of these camps, attempting to transcend the terms of the debate that separated them. For this reason, some scholars have regarded Du Châtelet as anticipating the philosophical attitude of Immanuel Kant later in the century. The Institutions", "Leibniz’s metaphysical ideas, mediated by Wolff, formed a foundation of Du Châtelet’s epistemology, and are discussed in the opening chapters of her Institutions. Letters 235, 237 and 244 reflect Wolff’s influence.", "His rhetorical framing in the letter allows him to distance himself from the scandalous materialism of his own work while feigning the role of a critic with metaphysical objections to the ideas presented therein – objections he believes Du Châtelet herself would have. In so doing, La Mettrie differentiates between empirical claims, as made by anatomists and medical practitioners like himself, and a priori propositions believed by his philosophical opponents, Du Châtelet among them, to be the necessary foundation of such empirical claims. While Du Châtelet was attempting to forge a middle ground between Leibniz and Newton in the Institutions, La Mettrie, in the letter, ironically criticizes this endeavor and marks the empirical, anti-metaphysical direction in which he wishes to take philosophy.", "Some scholars also argue that Du Châtelet’s letters influenced Maupertuis’s subsequent views on the principle of least action.", "Maupertuis was an eminent French mathematician and natural philosopher who became Du Châtelet’s mathematics tutor and friend. He was a proponent of Isaac Newton’s work against Cartesian physics, and was made a member of the Royal Society of London. He was responsible for helping to introduce Newton’s theory of gravity into France."; 2025.05.04/sciencedirect .com/science/article/abs/pii/S1878450X21000664 : "mid-18th Century France, the cooking and serving of meat dishes had been in decline for many years. Household cooks were invariably male and were experienced professionals serving those who could afford their expertise. In 1746, Menon, a prolific food writer, published a cook-book, “La Cuisiniere Bourgeiose”, which was specifically written for the female cook, What has not been noticed or addressed by previous authors, is the fact that the majority of recipes in this book are devoted to the cooking of meat and poultry. Within a few years of publication of the first edition, all subsequent editions carried this emphasis on meat cookery on the title pages. The book went though multiple editions attesting to its relevance and usefulness to the cooks to which it was directed. It is argued that this publication may have had a substantial influence on household meat cookery of the time.", "In mid-18th century France, a minor upheaval occurred in the way cookery in the home was handled. Two crucial elements contributed to this: First, female cooks were beginning to be employed in the household kitchens of the middle class and second, the expansion of meat cookery by such cooks was embraced. Is it possible that the central focus of one of the most widely reprinted cookbooks of the latter half of the 18th century, Menon's La Cuisiniere Bourgeoise (Menon 1746 (a))";
2026.01.02/http://45.151.91.208:6060/d3/y/1767318341/10000/g4/libgenrs_nonfiction/libgenrs_nonfiction/791000/6da190e7382bcd22f1bb6ccff1fcd966~/gqbj75mx8m5pVBb-FezoEg/annas-arch-6da190e7382b .pdf : "Experimentation as a source of new knowledge, achieved a preeminent status in England, partially due to the prece- dent of Newton and the Royal Society and partially to the peculiar status of the religious dissidents. The non-Conformists, excluded from Oxford and Cambridge, started their own schools and societies. Since their schools did not teach much Latin, Greek, or classical literature, they featured mathematics and science. Two groups typify the new societies. The Birmingham Lunar Society (They met when the moon was full) was founded after James Watt moved to Birmingham in 1744 and became a partner with Matthew Boulton in building steam engines. The membership included Josiah Wedgwood, Erasmus Darwin, and Joseph Priestley. Slightly later, in 1781 people associated with the Unitarian Chapel founded the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. They built a library, a college, a mechanics institute and sup- ported the experimental researches of Priestley, Dalton, and Joule.3
We will focus on the treatment of electrical and thermal phenomena and the struggle to achieve a mathematical account of quantities. Following Heilbron (1979), the development of the study of electricity prior to the nineteenth century may be divided into three stages. The first stage, lasting until 1700, is in the tradition of natural philosophy. Overtly, William Gilbert was opposed to Aristotle and Aris- totelians, with the rather surprising exception of Thomas Aquinas. In spite of this overt opposition, he relied on Aristotelian methods."
18th century-note:a

18th century physics-note:v
2025.05.07/en.everybodywiki .com/Applied_mathematics : "applied mathematics mainly consisted of applied analysis, particularly differential equations, approximation theory, and applied probability. These areas directly related to the development of Newtonian physics. The distinction between mathematicians and physicists was not sharply drawn before the mid-19th century, leaving a pedagogical legacy in the United States. Subjects like classical mechanics were often taught in applied mathematics departments rather than physics departments. Nowadays, quantitative finance and mathematical finance are considered branches of applied mathematics."; 2025.05.07/en.everybodywiki .com/Mathematical_physics : "rigorous, abstract and advanced reformulation of Newtonian mechanics adopting the Lagrangian mechanics and the Hamiltonian mechanics even in the presence of constraints. Both formulations are embodied in analytical mechanics.", "These approaches and ideas can be, and in fact have been, extended to other areas of physics as statistical mechanics, continuum mechanics, classical field theory and quantum field theory. Moreover, they have provided several examples and basic ideas in differential geometry (e.g. the theory of vector bundles and several notions in symplectic geometry).", "theory of partial differential equations (and the related areas of variational calculus, Fourier analysis, potential theory, and vector analysis) are perhaps most closely associated with mathematical physics. These were developed intensively from the second half of the 18th century (by, for example, D'Alembert, Euler, and Lagrange) until the 1930s. Physical applications of these developments include hydrodynamics, celestial mechanics, continuum mechanics, elasticity theory, acoustics, thermodynamics, electricity, magnetism, and aerodynamics.", "effort to put physical theories on a mathematically rigorous footing has inspired many mathematical developments. For example, the development of quantum mechanics and some aspects of functional analysis parallel each other in many ways. The mathematical study of quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, and quantum statistical mechanics has motivated results in operator algebras. The attempt to construct a rigorous quantum field theory has also brought about progress in fields such as representation theory. Use of geometry and topology plays an important role in string theory.", "principle of Galilean invariance/relativity was merely implicit in Newton's theory of motion. Having ostensibly reduced the Keplerian celestial laws of motion as well as Galilean terrestrial laws of motion to a unifying force, Newton achieved great mathematical rigor, but with theoretical laxity.", "major contribution to the formulation of Analytical Dynamics called Hamiltonian dynamics was also made by the Irish physicist, astronomer and mathematician, William Rowan Hamilton (1805-1865). Hamiltonian dynamics had played an important role in the formulation of modern theories in physics, including field theory and quantum mechanics."; 2025.05.08/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Thoughts_on_the_True_Estimation_of_Living_Forces : Kant's first publication on Natural Philosophy. "written in 1744–46 when Kant was a young student, it was published in 1749 (not 1747, as is often claimed) since publication was delayed for three years due to financial issues."..."settle the vis viva debate amongst Descartes and Leibniz as well as their respective followers."..."Kant criticized Leibniz's followers for looking "no further than the senses teach," and stayed close to Leibniz's original bis activa ("active force"; also known as vis viva, "living force") point of view."; 2025.05.08/systematics .org/journal/vol11-3/Leibniz_Dynamical_Metaphysics.pdf : p.1: "vis viva notion was to emerge as the first element of a new science, which differed significantly from that of Descartes and Newton, and which Leibniz called the science of dynamics. In what follows, I attempt to clarify the various strands which were woven into the vis viva concept, noting especially the conceptual framework which emerged and later evolved into the science of dynamics as we know it today. I shall argue, in general, that Leibniz’ science of dynamics developed as a consistent physical interpretation of certain of his metaphysical and mathematical beliefs."; 2025.05.09/sciencedirect .com/science/article/abs/pii/S0039368104000536 : No account of the reception of Newtonian science in France would be complete without some mention of first French translator of Newton's Principia mathematica, Gabrielle-Émilie le Tonnelier de Breteuil, Marquise du Chätelet. Completed in 1749, but not published turnip 1756/1759...Her translation represents the culmination of a process of engagement with Newton that can be traced through the last dozen years of her life. In this paper I propose to focus on an earlier stage of that process by examining another work, her Institutions de Philosophie, in the context of her championship of Newton.... How influential her translation was to spread Newtonianism in France is questionable., We have to recognise that Newton's Principia mathematica was a work requiring such a high level of technical expertise, that the specialist readership equipped to understand it was probably also sufficiently educated in Latin to use either Newton's original or the Jacquier edition., In 1734, Madame du Châtelet had confessed to Maupertius that she lacks sufficiently proficient understanding in algebra. She was no doubt mindful of the difficulties of communication with a non-expert audience when she included with her translation of the Principia her Exposition abregée du Systéme du Monde, designed, as Judith Zidane suggests, to render the work more accessible to French readers. But no means of acceding her public role.
18th century physics-note:a

18th century physics textbook:v
2025.04.30/zlib .pub/download/emilie-du-chatelet-and-the-foundations-of-physical-science-15pkeb19rs5g?hash=6101587a11adbb84059e1e911bad420b
18th century physics textbook:a

1747-1753-notes:v
2025.03.14: 2019-12-14: Policing London - The Bow Street Runners - Extra History - Part 3: 0:10 Parliament banned Henry Fielding from London stage. 0:17 He wrote 1749 fiction "Tom Jones". A book that reshaped the English novel into something that entertained the reader while also conveying a message. Only his second-biggest achievement that year. 1st-biggest achievement as a literary wit & political satirist started London's first police force.
0:54 Writer, obsessed with rules, rule-breakers, street life, fraudsters, taverns, criminals, brothel worker's life & chronicling both thrills & darkside of endless gin-soaked party that was 18th centur London. How was particularly interested in Jonathon Wilde, making the disgraced thief-taker the subject of an early satirical novel in it. Fielding directly compared Wilde to the politician he hated most, prime minister Robert Walpole. 1:27 All that was wrong in London's judicial system, thief taking bounties that encouraged corruption, vacuum of power on the London streets where the government consistently failed to fund law enforcement solutions, system of public execution that instead of serving as a deterrent, made the most infamous of criminals into celebrities & magistrates so dirty that they were little different from criminals they prosecuted. After he was banned from stage, Fielding became a lawyer in order to support himself which allowed him to see the criminal Justice system firsthand. Then in 1748, he got the chance to put his literary & moral ideals into practice. His work as a partisan political journalist had won him friends in the government leading to an appointment as the magistrate for Westminister.
2:09 £500 a year & ability to live & work of Bow Street Magistrates Court. Now justice Fielding kept his family upstairs & uses the expansive room downstairs as a magistrate's court. This type takes the accused into custody. Examine suspects, collect evidence, either send them to criminal court for trial or release them. He quickly found the system even dirtier than he anticipated. Seat magistrates were not listed dont government, instead they funded themselves by extracting fees from those that came before them.
2:41 Recipe for corruption. Fielding found that the promised income of £500 for his services came from extortionary funds & bribery. A previous justice reportedly gave sex workers lenient judgements in exchange for their services. 2:58 Running a clean court netted him £300, barely enough to support the court & himself, but he worked hard, often cross-examining suspects well into the night & committing 50 into custody every week, then he started to try implementing his reforms. First, he opened the court to the public, letting the people see & understand the new order. He appealed for a pension from the government so that he wasn't reliant on the inherent corruption of feast, a practice that would later become standard for magistrates & he got his jurisdiction extended so suspects could not escape justice by just fleeing to the neighboring parish & then that winter, he went to war with the street robbery gangs that were terrorizing London. While London did have parish constables, men elected by parish residents to theoretically take suspects into custody, this system was centuries-old & unworkable, their jurisdictions were tiny & often the designated constable, who also keeps running his regular businesses to make ends meet, hired a deputy to do the actual work & those deputies were usually infirm, unenthusiastic or corrupt. None wanted to risk conflicting with violent offenders. It was common for a constable to walk past a criminal in street, a warrant for the man in their very pocket & failed to stop him out of fear. In reality, London worked off medieval hue & cry system, where citizens were expected to drop everything to stop a crime in progress they saw & apprehend criminals themselves. Fielding gathered the best constables he could find & put them under best constable in London & grocer Saunders Welsh. All semi-professionals with day jobs.
4:30 Fielding's plan: Warrant to all criminals, put pistols & swords with warrant in tip staves, disperse their man. This is where the phase: "Struck by a warrant." comes from.
4:55 They descended on travers & brothels, overwhelming suspects, who might  have been inclined to call their comrades into a brawl & then they dragged those suspects to Bow Street. The experiment was an unmitigated success, making Fielding one of the most prominent law enforcement figures in all of London & it also in turn gave him a group of constables to call upon when needed & just in time, because in the summer of 1749, multi-day riots rocked Westminister as a group of sailors robbed by women in the city sex trade sacked & burned several brothels while Fielding was away, Welsh & his constables called out the soldiers to end the disturbance, taking several suspected riders into custody & when Fielding returned to Bow Street, he found it under siege. A crowd of rioters demanding the suspects be let free. He examined the arrested ringleaders, sent them to Newgate & then helped Organise a force of guards to regain control. While after all this, Fielding did emerged with a black mark. One of the men executed was probably wrongly convicted. The government appreciated his initiative & he gained further favor that same year when he received a tip that several gambling house owners planned to assassinate the Lord Chancellor over new anti-gambling laws. Fielding broke up the plot with a raid. By the end of 1750, Fielding had 6 trained constables to serve warrants & keep peace. He drew manuals for their conduct & trained them how to collect evidence, questioned suspects & give testimony but with no financial support form government & forced to find them with thief-taking bounties, he had to temporarily disband the group so he changed focus, working to Shepherd through new laws restricting thief-taking & public drunkenness. He also pioneered the police lineup, even telling suspects to switch clothes to rule out false positives. Most of all, he used his journalistic skills for community outreach, publishing a paper called The Covent Garden Journal, featured accounts from the court & asked the public to partner with Bow Street. He invited victims to view recent arrestees in case they recognized them from other crimes & called for witnesses. Any description of suspects or stolen property, he kept in a record database, but unfortunately, few victims ever made reports. They were all too afraid. Violent street robberies were once again surging, driven by criminal syndicates who operated with impunity called by the government to suggest what could be done. Fielding made a proposal, give him £600 & he would reform with the Bow Street Runners but rather than only operating in Fielding's jurisdiction in Westminister, they would strike citywide, making arrests under the thief-taking laws. The force however would have to remain secret because thief-taking was hugely unpopular among the public & if they heard that an organized force of thief-takers was loose in city, people would assuredly call for its abolishment. Even 30 years after his hanging, the memory of Jonathan Wilde was just still too fresh, but the government agreed & it was the first time, London officials would find a group specifically meant to tackle crime. Fielding's plan was to form a clean version of Wilde's operation, taking constables of unimpeachable reputation & using them for public good, prosecuting crime not for personal gain, but rather for public order & justice. Government issued first payment and Fielding called up Welsh & the Bow Street Runners. At the beginning of the 1754, they struck. 
8:17 It was a rough operation, much more dangerous than the previous fights with the gangs.
8:36 Fielding could not enjoy his success. His half-brother John who'd been assisting for a year had mostly taken over Fielding's duties by then, because Henry Fielding had already been sick when he arrived at Bow Street. A misspent youth in taverns & coffeehouses leaving him with gout & cirrhosis. The long hours at Bow Street only worsened his health. He took a voyage to Lisbon, hoping to improve in a better environment but instead he died there. 9:07 Under his half-brother John, the Bow Street Runners would increasingly take on investigative & patrol duties becoming detectives in all but name & John himself would later become a London legend known for his ability 9:19 to recognize 3.000 criminal voices because like Justice, half-brother John Fielding was blind.; YT: 2024-09-30: ChiChu Liu: Description: "Visited on 21 Sep 2024." Built in 1750, The Churchill's Arms has claim of being most famous pub in London. First to serve Thai food in London.; 
1747-1753-notes:a

Genius-note:v
Charles Murray's gwern's pdf: p.21: "bison in Ohio, wolves in Germany, lions in Greece", 
p.23: "Agriculture can require more labor than hunting and gathering—leisure time probably decreased for the average male who was now an agriculturalist rather than a hunter. Evidence from prehistoric skeletons suggests that life expectancy may also have decreased after the introduction of agriculture. Domesticated animals brought with them diseases such as beriberi, rickets, diphtheria, and perhaps leprosy. Milk alone can transmit some 30 distinct diseases.", 
p.24: "–8000. Agriculture requires that humans cease being nomads and put down roots in one place.The tasks of harvesting and storing food spur technological innovation. Riverine agriculture, the only option in the arid lands where the Neolithic revolution began, requires irrigation. Irrigation requires technological innovation and complex forms of social organization.", 
p.27: "Britain has been ruled from Rome almost 150 years longer than today’s United States has been in existence. Roman Britain as of 407 has ancient and prominent families, with lineages going back for a dozen generations—every generation of which spoke Latin. Some of them live in magnificent villas that are older in 407 than many of the vener- able stately homes of today’s Britain.", 
p.33: "first 4,000 years, then a period in which great advances in human accomplishment took place at rates ranging from gradual (Sumer) to stunningly fast (Egypt), and then a downward slide everywhere but in China, which was still in an early stage of development. Or to put it another way, the world’s leading technological, artistic, and economic societies in –800 were not nearly as advanced as Egypt had been 1,500 years earlier.", 
p.46: Rome..."clinical descriptions of disease were reasonably accurate, but the etiology of those diseases was conjecture, almost always wrong.", 
p.164: "Great achievement in the sciences differs from great achievement in the arts. The artist creates something unique.", 
p.165: "scientist’s eminence is more ambiguous. The scientist is engaged in an intellectual Easter egg hunt.", "first is the harsh rule that serves as a powerful engine for scientific progress: The winner is the one who grabs the egg first, not the one who sees it first. Almost everyone has heard of Alexander Graham Bell. Almost no one has heard of Elisha Gray. Bell and Gray independently invented similar devices for transmitting speech over electric wires, but Elisha Gray submitted his application for a patent two hours later than did Alexander Graham Bell. Examples of such unfairness stud the history of science.", "Darwin had become an evolutionist in 1837, shortly after returning from his famous voyage in the Beagle, and formulated the principle of natural selection by the end of 1838. But although he prepared enough written material in the form of corre- spondence and notebooks to establish his priority when the necessity arose, he postponed publication for 20 years. He was finally impelled to action in 1858 when he learned that an obscure naturalist of humble origins named Alfred Russel Wallace was about to publish his own version of the theory of evolution. As Darwin wrote to Lyell after seeing Wallace’s paper, “I never saw a more striking coincidence; if Wallace had my manuscript sketch written out in 1842, he could not have made a better short abstract! . . . so all my originality, whatever it may amount to, will be smashed.", "classic display of Victorian gentleman- liness, Wallace suggested they present their papers jointly, acknowledged Darwin’s priority, and never complained.", p.166: "second unfairness involves the frequent discrepancy between a scientific discovery’s importance and the difficulty of discovering it.", p.167: "differences between great achievement in the arts and in the sciences lend themselves to a generalization: In the arts, eminence arises from genius manifested in a body of work. In the sciences, eminence arises from the importance of the discovery, which may or may not be the result of genius.", "difference depends on how one chooses to value two different kinds of scientific contribution that I label brick laying and system building.", 
p.168: "With a single theory, Copernicus built a system that fundamentally altered not only astronomy but Western civilization. Herschel laid bricks— many bricks, soundly made, constituting a major part of the foundation for modern astronomy.", 
p.195: 1924 South Africa "Raymond Dart discovers Australopithecus and categorizes it as a hominid, neither human nor ape.", 
p.269: At roughly 1800, the rest of west increases in scientific inventories.
p.270: "beginning, when China and others were ahead, almost all the trans- mission went one way, from the outside to Europe. That was Europe’s great virtue: unlike China, Europe was a learner. . . . Later on, of course, the story was different: Once Europe had invented modern science, the current flowed back, though not without resistance.", 
p.378: Highest positive: GDP per capita, highest negative correlation: Despotism. Positive: 1.Parliamentary Monarchy, 2.Tolerant Autocracy, 3.Liberal Democracy, Negative: 4.Despotism. +Political, economical center., University, especially Elite University.
p.424: "Renaissance Catholicism is to the left of Reformation Protestantism on autonomous efficacy mostly because they can’t both go in the same spot[34]). It goes without saying that both were also centers of accomplishment. I place the Enlightenment just below Protestantism on Purpose—the Enlighten- ment’s passionate commitment to reason was close to religious.", 
p.631:"Almost all the generalizations about cities that follow in the text have changed in the last half century, altered by the growth of suburbs and, more recently, the ability of people to do work in rural areas that formerly had to be done in close physical proximity to colleagues, models, institutions, libraries, and audi- ences. But they held true until 1950.", 
p.636: ft.:34:"not prepared to argue that Protestantism affirmed autonomous efficacy any more than Renaissance Catholicism did. Indeed, one could argue that the doctrine of the Calvinist doctrine of predestination should have had a depressing effect on autonomous efficacy, not an energizing one. Weber’s original essay deals with this issue most effectively (Weber 1958: 98–128). Simplifying radically, insofar as predestination was a felt belief (it was not, for many Protestants), its practical effect was to inspire achievement as a visible proof, to oneself as well as to others, that one was among the elect.", ft.35:"raised as a mainstream Presbyterian, was drawn to Buddhism during the six years I lived in Asia (and still am), currently attend Quaker meetings, and can best be described as an agnostic.",
p.543: Earth Science: "Leakey, Louis" 1943 Kenya, 
p.553: Constantine of Africa 1055 No Africa [constantinusafricanus .com/2017/12/22/ego-constantinus-africanus-montis-cassinensis-monacus : "Constantinus Africanus (Constantine the African) is likely the most famous medieval writer most people have never heard of. At latest count, we can identify at least 1000 extant manuscript copies of his three dozen writings on various aspects of medicine. Those writings, collectively, probably comprise over one million words. To put that in perspective, the most famous Benedictine monk of the Middle Ages, Benedict of Nursia, is represented in only about 300 extant copies of his Rule describing the monastic life.", "Constantine was the first to render a major body of Arabic science into Latin.", "no one had yet attempted what Constantine did: bringing a whole science, from introductory textbooks to works of great complexity, into the Latin language. Once translated, these works could—and did—circulate all over Europe. They transformed medical theory and practice in the lands we think of as western Europe", "Constantine’s self-naming raises a host of intriguing questions. All evidence suggests that he did indeed come from “Africa,” which here means the North African territory of “Ifriqiyah,”", Modern Tunisia, "Ifriqiyah had come under Muslim rule in the eighth century, as part of the general expansion of Islam across North Africa.", "Constantine was a native Arabic speaker."],
p.554: "Theiler, Max" 1939 So Africa,
p.Between: Used "Britain" in 17 century.
p.595: "Itay"
p.623: "DoSB contains an entry for just one African scientific figure throughout this period (Percy Julian, an African-American) that I was able to identify as such. The other Africans are mentioned exclusively by one source, Porter and Ogilvie 2000, which in its introduction openly states that it sought to repre- sent minorities and women. Considering these factors plus the small numbers involved, the safest assumption is that the African trendline in the scientific domain from the latter part of 19C through about 1980 (when the informa- tion in the sources dwindles down) is flat.", [Critic to Porter and Ogilvie: 2025.03.16/chemeducator .org/bibs/0007004/740238mr.htm : Being too british-centric & lesser scientists-focused "Lavoisier rates only 1-1/2 pages, whereas lesser figures, in chemistry and other fields, receive equal or greater coverage" (Lavoisier was highest in system-building & brick-laying by Charles Murray's human accomplishment pdf.), fewer russian scientists], [Least greek-influenced genius:v
Charles Murray's 2003 pdf: p.26: "Europe that is being introduced to the mathematical concept of zero recently imported from the Arabs (who in turn had borrowed zero from the Indians)", p.87:Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations.,p.149: "Veda, the founding document of Hinduism. A collection of 108 discourses, the Upanishads was transmitted orally for an indeterminate period.We have some of the names of the indi- vidual authors, but none of them has a sufficiently central role to qualify for major credit, let alone to take credit for authorship of the work as a whole.", "named philosopher
who dominates the index even more decisively than Confu- cius dominated the Chinese philosophy index is Sankara, who added metaphysics and system to the haphazard insights of the Upanishads,", p.150:"even Sankara was an inter- preter of an existing tradition. The West followed that pattern through 17C, with all the great figures drawing substan- tially from the Platonic or
Aristotelian traditions. But then came Kant, whose contributions amounted to an expansion of philosophic thought after the founders that is unique among the three great philosophic traditions. He was followed by the innovative and influential 19C contributions of Hegel, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche." , p.205: important event: "700 India" "Over the course of 8C, a full and consistent use of zero develops", > 2025.03.20/DebateArena: Brahmagupta did. borrowed ideas from Babylon & Greek.; 2025.03.21/encyclopedia .com/people/science-and-technology/astronomy-biographies/brahmagupta : "Influenced by the spread of Greek mathematical ideas eastward during the imperial expansion of the ancient Roman empire, Brahmagupta's ideas in turn had an impact on later European developments", "single inventor of the concept of zero, Brahmagupta is a reasonable candidate for that title.", "Brahmagupta was born in c. 598, perhaps in the astronomically significant ancient Indian city of Ujjain—a place near the tropic of cancer that occupies a place in Indian history somewhat comparable to that of Greenwich in England. It was a central reckoning point for ideas of time and space, and it became a major astronomical and mathematical center.", "devout Hindu who took care not to antagonize his own religious leaders", "ancient Greeks and even the Babylonians had dealt superstition a major blow by predicting eclipses, Brahmagupta refined their computational methods and helped to spread an understanding of these phenomena throughout societies where eclipses were still regarded as divine signs.", "Brahmagupta's most important innovations, however, pertained to his treatment of the number zero. Several different discoveries converged to form the concept of zero. The circular symbol for the number and the idea of representing orders of magnitude in a number through the use of places arose at different times and places in advance of Brahmagupta's work.", "Brahmagupta, however, was the first to propose rules for the behavior of zero in common arithmetical equations, relating zero to positive and negative numbers (which he called fortunes and debts). He correctly stated that multiplying any number by zero yields a result of zero, but erred, as did many other ancient mathematicians, in attempting to define division by zero. Nevertheless, Brahmagupta is sometimes referred to as the "Father of Zero."", "Brahmagupta's Khandakhadyaka refers to a date in the year 665 and is thought to have been written at that time, when Brahmagupta was about 67—an extremely old man by the standards of the time. He died sometime soon after that, perhaps in 670."; 2025.03.18/ijfmr .com/papers/2024/3/23400.pdf : "village called Bhillamala in NorthWestRajastan, then the capital of the Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty in the year 598 AD. during the reign of the Chavda dynasty ruler, Vyagrahamukha. He was the son of Jishnugupta and was a Hindu by religion, in particular, a Shaivite. He was born into a mathematical family, as his father was an astrologer. Brahmagupta considered himself to be an astrologer like his father rather than a mathematician. He relied more on his religion to be his guide in his discoveries. Many of his proofs and claims of the world in mathematics are written as poetry, yet they are still accounted as proofs and claims. He was certainly a mathematician of preeminence for his times, but he also had the habit of criticizing his predecessors sharply for some of their faults and omissions."; <X 2025.03.18/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Pratihara_dynasty : "c. 598 – c. 668"..."gained prominence after the downfall of the Chavda kingdom in the course of resisting the invading forces led by the Arabs who controlled Sindh."; <X en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Chavda_dynasty : Hinduism., Arabs.; <X en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Gurjaradesa :"Gurjaradēśa, or Gurjara country, is first attested in Bana's Harshacharita (7th century CE). Its king is said to have been subdued by Harsha's father Prabhakaravardhana (died c. 605 CE).[3] The bracketing of the country with Sindha (Sindh), Lāta (southern Gujarat) and Malava (western Malwa) indicates that the region including the northern Gujarat and Rajasthan is meant.[4] Hieun Tsang, the Chinese Buddhist pilgrim who visited India between 631–645 CE during Harsha's reign, mentioned the Gurjara country (Kiu-che-lo) with its capital at Bhinmal (Pi-lo-mo-lo) as the second largest kingdom of Western India.", "628 CE, the kingdom at Bhinmal was ruled by a Chapa dynasty ruler Vyāgrahamukha, under whose reign the mathematician-astronomer Brahmagupta wrote his famous treatise. It is believed that the young ruler mentioned by Hieun Tsang must have been his immediate successor.[7] It appears that the Gurjara country at that time comprised modern Rajasthan."; 2025.03.18/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Bhinmal : "Xuanzang, the Chinese Buddhist pilgrim who visited India between 631 and 645 AD during Harsha's reign, mentioned this place as Pi-lo-mo-lo."; 2025.05.11/open.ac .uk/blogs/MathEd/index.php/2022/08/25/the-men-who-invented-zero/ : "Indian culture there is an idea of one having a “nothing” or a void inside of yourself. Long before the conception of zero as a digit, this philosophical concept was taught within Hinduism and Buddhism and practised through meditation.  The ancient Hindu symbol, the “Bindi” or “Bindu”, a circle with a dot in the centre symbolised this and was what probably led to the use of an oval as the symbol for the Sunya. It has been suggested that this cultural and philosophical influence on the concept of zero is what allowed India to develop what previous civilizations did not think of.", "Brahmagupta was also the first to demonstrate that zero can be reached through calculation. He wrote these rules in his book the “Brahmasphutasiddhanta”."; 2025.05.10/math.fandom .com/wiki/Brahmagupta : "He likely lived most of his life in Bhillamala (modern Bhinmal in Rajasthan) in the empire of Harsha during the reign (and possibly under the patronage) of King Vyaghramukha.[1] As a result, Brahmagupta is often referred to as Bhillamalacarya, that is, the teacher from Bhillamala Bhinmal. He was the head of the astronomical observatory at Ujjain, and during his tenure there wrote four texts on mathematics and astronomy: the Cadamekela in 624, the Brahmasphutasiddhanta in 628, the Khandakhadyaka in 665, and the Durkeamynarda in 672.", "Zero and four fundamental operations first appeared in Brahmasputa siddhanta.
Although Brahmagupta was familiar with the works of astronomers following the tradition of Aryabhatiya, it is not known if he was familiar with the work of Bhaskara I, a contemporary.[1] Brahmagupta had a plethora of criticism directed towards the work of rival astronomers, and in his Brahmasphutasiddhanta is found one of the earliest attested schisms among Indian mathematicians. The division was primarily about the application of mathematics to the physical world, rather than about the mathematics itself. In Brahmagupta's case, the disagreements stemmed largely from the choice of astronomical parameters and theories.", "Brahmagupta's most famous work is his Brahmasphudiasiddhanta. It is composed in elliptic verse, as was common practice in Indian mathematics, and consequently has a poetic ring to it. As no proofs are given, it is not known how Brahmagupta's mathematics was derived.", "extent of Greek influence on this syncopation, if any, is not known and it is possible that both Greek and Indian syncopation may be derived from a common Babylonian source.[5]" ; 2026.04.10/vajiramandravi .com/upsc-exam/gupta-empire/ : "Religious Developments during the Gupta Empire  The Guptas were a Hindu dynasty known for their devout Hinduism, but they allowed Buddhists and Jainists to practice their religions. Nalanda University: Founded by Kumaragupta I around 455 CE, it became a renowned centre for learning and is associated with the formalisation of the caste system through endogamy during this era. Narasimhagupta Baladitya: Influenced by Mahayana Buddhism, he constructed a sangharama and a 300-foot-high vihara in Nalanda and was celebrated for his patronage of Buddhism. Vajra: As the son of Narasimhagupta, he continued the legacy of supporting Buddhism, evidenced by Xuanzang’s accounts of his devout sponsorship.",
Chandragupta II (c. 376 – 413/415 CE) : "- He successfully seized control of the western Malwa and Gujarat regions from Shakas.", "Guptas also issued silver coins after their conquest of Gujarat, primarily for local trade, and the use of copper coins was limited compared to the Kushans.", Decline in long-distance trade,
"Demand for Indian silk abroad had already weakened by the mid-fifth century. Silk weavers from western India migrated to Mandasor in Malwa and shifted to other professions.", Emergence of priestly landlords: "Forced labour (Vishti) was imposed on peasants in central and western India.",
Gupta Empire Decline: Internal conflicts: Major conflicts and divisions among the royal clans destabilized the rule and weakened the empire. The Huns successfully colonised regions such as Gandhara, Punjab, Gujarat, and Malwa, eroding the control of the Gupta Empire.,
"	•	Religious shift: Gupta rulers started following Buddhist practices instead of Hinduism, which further weakened the empire.
* Neglect of military conquests: The Guptas shifted their focus away from military conquests and expansion, contributing to the decline of the empire.
Incompetent rulers and external pressures:"...
"Unity and sufficient resources were crucial for maintaining the empire, which was lacking.",
"Setbacks in western India and the loss of trading opportunities with the Mediterranean contributed to economic challenges.",
"migration of the silk weavers' establishment from Gujarat to Malwa, the lack of demand for their products, and fading trade perks in Gujarat impacted the empire.";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Huna_people : "religious beliefs of the Hunas are unknown, and believed to be a combination of ancestor worship, totemism and animism.[24]  Songyun and Huisheng, who visited the chief of the Hephthalite nomads at his summer residence in Badakshan and later in Gandhara, observed that they had no belief in the Buddhist law and served a large number of divinities."[25]";
2026.04.11/studycountry .com/wiki/who-were-the-huns-in-the-gupta-empire : "It was around 470 CE that White Hun raids into India are said to have begun or at least reached a high point, when the Gupta king Skandagupta died. The Tegin (or governor) Khingila is said to have led these raids into India, taking Gandhara from the Kidarites in 475 CE.";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Skandagupta : "r. c. 455–467) was a Gupta Emperor. His Bhitari pillar inscription suggests that he restored the Gupta power by defeating his enemies, who may have been rebels or foreign invaders. He repulsed an invasion by the Indo-Hephthalites (known as Hunas in India), probably the Kidarites. He seems to have maintained control of his inherited territory, and is generally considered the last of the great Gupta Emperors. The Gupta genealogy after him is unclear, but he was most probably succeeded by Purugupta, who appears to have been his younger half-brother.";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Indian_astronomy : "Some of the earliest roots of Indian astronomy can be dated to the period of Indus Valley civilisation or earlier.[1][2] Astronomy later developed as a discipline of Vedanga, or one of the "auxiliary disciplines" associated with the study of the Vedas[3] dating 1500 BCE or older.[4] The oldest known text is the Vedanga Jyotisha, dated to 1400–1200 BCE (with the extant form possibly from 700 to 600 BCE).[5]  Indian astronomy was influenced by Greek astronomy beginning in the 4th century BCE[6][7][8] and through the early centuries of the Common Era, for example by the Yavanajataka[6] and the Romaka Siddhanta, a Sanskrit translation of a Greek text disseminated from the 2nd century.[9]  Indian astronomy flowered in the 5th–6th century, with Aryabhata, whose work, Aryabhatiya, represented the pinnacle of astronomical knowledge at the time. The Aryabhatiya is composed of four sections, covering topics such as units of time, methods for determining the positions of planets, the cause of day and night, and several other cosmological concepts.[10] Later, Indian astronomy significantly influenced Muslim astronomy, Chinese astronomy, European astronomy and others.[11] Other astronomers of the classical era who further elaborated on Aryabhata's work include Brahmagupta, Varahamihira and Lalla.",
"Greek astronomical ideas began to enter India in the 4th century BCE following the conquests of Alexander the Great.[6][7][8][9] By the early centuries of the Common Era, Indo-Greek influence on the astronomical tradition is visible, with texts such as the Yavanajataka[6] and Romaka Siddhanta.[9] Later astronomers mention the existence of various siddhantas during this period, among them a text known as the Surya Siddhanta. These were not fixed texts but rather an oral tradition of knowledge, and their content is not extant. The text today known as Surya Siddhanta dates to the Gupta period and was received by Aryabhata.  The classical era of Indian astronomy begins in the late Gupta era, in the 5th to 6th centuries. The Pañcasiddhāntikā by Varāhamihira (505 CE) approximates the method for determination of the meridian direction from any three positions of the shadow using a gnomon.[13]",
"Brahmagupta (598–668 CE): Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta (Correctly Established Doctrine of Brahma, 628 CE) dealt with both Indian mathematics and astronomy. Hayashi (2008) writes: "It was translated into Arabic in Baghdad about 771 and had a major impact on Islamic mathematics and astronomy".[25] In Khandakhadyaka (A Piece Eatable, 665 CE) Brahmagupta reinforced Aryabhata's idea of another day beginning at midnight.[25] Brahmagupta also calculated the instantaneous motion of a planet, gave correct equations for parallax, and some information related to the computation of eclipses.[3] His works introduced the Indian concept of mathematics based astronomy into the Arab world.[3] He also theorized that all bodies with mass are attracted to the Earth.[26]";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Indian_mathematics : "Indian mathematics emerged in the Indian subcontinent[1] from 1200 BCE[2] until the end of the 18th century. In the classical period of Indian mathematics (400 CE to 1200 CE), important contributions were made by scholars like Aryabhata, Brahmagupta, Bhaskara II, Varāhamihira, and Madhava. The decimal number system in use today[3] was first recorded in Indian mathematics.[4] Indian mathematicians made early contributions to the study of the concept of zero as a number,[5] negative numbers,[6] arithmetic, and algebra.[7] In addition, trigonometry[8] was further advanced in India, and, in particular, the modern definitions of sine and cosine were developed there.[9] These mathematical concepts were transmitted to the Middle East, China, and Europe[7] and led to further developments that now form the foundations of many areas of mathematics.  Ancient and medieval Indian mathematical works, all composed in Sanskrit, usually consisted of a section of sutras in which a set of rules or problems were stated with great economy in verse in order to aid memorization by a student. This was followed by a second section consisting of a prose commentary (sometimes multiple commentaries by different scholars) that explained the problem in more detail and provided justification for the solution. In the prose section, the form (and therefore its memorization) was not considered so important as the ideas involved.[1][10] All mathematical works were orally transmitted until approximately 500 BCE; thereafter, they were transmitted both orally and in manuscript form. The oldest extant mathematical document produced on the Indian subcontinent is the birch bark Bakhshali Manuscript, discovered in 1881 in the village of Bakhshali, near Peshawar (modern day Pakistan) and is likely from the 7th century CE.[11][12]",
"The Śulba Sūtras (literally, "Aphorisms of the Chords" in Vedic Sanskrit) (c. 700–400 BCE) list rules for the construction of sacrificial fire altars.[23] Most mathematical problems considered in the Śulba Sūtras spring from "a single theological requirement",[24] that of constructing fire altars which have different shapes but occupy the same area. The altars were required to be constructed of five layers of burnt brick, with the further condition that each layer consist of 200 bricks and that no two adjacent layers have congruent arrangements of bricks.[24]  According to Hayashi, the Śulba Sūtras contain "the earliest extant verbal expression of the Pythagorean Theorem in the world, although it had already been known to the Old Babylonians."",
"Jain mathematics (400 BCE – 200 CE)":  "Although Jainism as a religion and philosophy predates its most famous exponent, Mahavira (6th century BCE), most Jain texts on mathematical topics were composed after the 6th century BCE. Jain mathematicians are important historically as crucial links between the mathematics of the Vedic period and that of the "classical period."  A significant historical contribution of Jain mathematicians lay in their freeing Indian mathematics from its religious and ritualistic constraints. In particular, their fascination with the enumeration of very large numbers and infinities led them to classify numbers into three classes: enumerable, innumerable and infinite. Not content with a simple notion of infinity, their texts define five different types of infinity: the infinite in one direction, the infinite in two directions, the infinite in area, the infinite everywhere, and the infinite perpetually.",
"In addition, Jain mathematicians devised notations for simple powers (and exponents) of numbers like squares and cubes, which enabled them to define simple algebraic equations (bījagaṇita samīkaraṇa). Jain mathematicians were apparently also the first to use the word shunya (literally void in Sanskrit) to refer to zero. This word is the ultimate etymological origin of the English word "zero", as it was calqued into Arabic as ṣifr and then subsequently borrowed into Medieval Latin as zephirum, finally arriving at English after passing through one or more Romance languages (cf. French zéro, Italian zero).[40]",
"The knowers of the sūtra know it as having few phonemes, being devoid of ambiguity, containing the essence, facing everything, being without pause and unobjectionable.[46]",
"The earliest mathematical prose commentary was that on the work, Āryabhaṭīya (written 499 CE), a work on astronomy and mathematics. The mathematical portion of the Āryabhaṭīya was composed of 33 sūtras (in verse form) consisting of mathematical statements or rules, but without any proofs.[51] However, according to Hayashi,[52] "this does not necessarily mean that their authors did not prove them. It was probably a matter of style of exposition." From the time of Bhaskara I (600 CE onwards), prose commentaries increasingly began to include some derivations (upapatti). Bhaskara I's commentary on the Āryabhaṭīya, had the following structure:[51]  Rule ('sūtra') in verse by Āryabhaṭa Commentary by Bhāskara I, consisting of: Elucidation of rule (derivations were still rare then, but became more common later) Example (uddeśaka) usually in verse. Setting (nyāsa/sthāpanā) of the numerical data. Working (karana) of the solution. Verification (pratyayakaraṇa, literally "to make conviction") of the answer. These became rare by the 13th century, derivations or proofs being favoured by then.[51] Typically, for any mathematical topic, students in ancient India first memorised the sūtras, which, as explained earlier, were "deliberately inadequate"[50] in explanatory details (in order to pithily convey the bare-bone mathematical rules). The students then worked through the topics of the prose commentary by writing (and drawing diagrams) on chalk- and dust-boards (i.e. boards covered with dust). The latter activity, a staple of mathematical work, was to later prompt mathematician-astronomer, Brahmagupta (fl. 7th century CE), to characterise astronomical computations as "dust work" (Sanskrit: dhulikarman).[53]",
"It is well known that the decimal place-value system in use today was first recorded in India, then transmitted to the Islamic world, and eventually to Europe.[54] The Syrian bishop Severus Sebokht wrote in the mid-7th century CE about the "nine signs" of the Indians for expressing numbers.[54] However, how, when, and where the first decimal place value system was invented is not so clear.[55]  The earliest extant script used in India was the Kharoṣṭhī script used in the Gandhara culture of the north-west. It is thought to be of Aramaic origin and it was in use from the 4th century BCE to the 4th century CE. Almost contemporaneously, another script, the Brāhmī script, appeared on much of the sub-continent, and would later become the foundation of many scripts of South Asia and South-east Asia. Both scripts had numeral symbols and numeral systems, which were initially not based on a place-value system.[56]  The earliest surviving evidence of decimal place value numerals in India and southeast Asia is from the middle of the first millennium CE.[57] A copper plate from Gujarat, India mentions the date 595 CE, written in a decimal place value notation, although there is some doubt as to the authenticity of the plate.[57] Decimal numerals recording the years 683 CE have also been found in stone inscriptions in Indonesia and Cambodia, where Indian cultural influence was substantial.[57]  There are older textual sources, although the extant manuscript copies of these texts are from much later dates.[58] Probably the earliest such source is the work of the Buddhist philosopher Vasumitra dated likely to the 1st century CE.[58] Discussing the counting pits of merchants, Vasumitra remarks, "When [the same] clay counting-piece is in the place of units, it is denoted as one, when in hundreds, one hundred."[58] Although such references seem to imply that his readers had knowledge of a decimal place value representation, the "brevity of their allusions and the ambiguity of their dates, however, do not solidly establish the chronology of the development of this concept."[58]  A third decimal representation was employed in a verse composition technique, later labelled Bhuta-sankhya (literally, "object numbers") used by early Sanskrit authors of technical books.[59] Since many early technical works were composed in verse, numbers were often represented by objects in the natural or religious world that correspondence to them; this allowed a many-to-one correspondence for each number and made verse composition easier.[59] According to Plofker,[60] the number 4, for example, could be represented by the word "Veda" (since there were four of these religious texts), the number 32 by the word "teeth" (since a full set consists of 32), and the number 1 by "moon" (since there is only one moon).[59] So, Veda/teeth/moon would correspond to the decimal numeral 1324, as the convention for numbers was to enumerate their digits from right to left.[59] The earliest reference employing object numbers is a c. 269 CE Sanskrit text, Yavanajātaka (literally "Greek horoscopy") of Sphujidhvaja, a versification of an earlier (c. 150 CE) Indian prose adaptation of a lost work of Hellenistic astrology.[61] Such use seems to make the case that by the mid-3rd century CE, the decimal place value system was familiar, at least to readers of astronomical and astrological texts in India.[59]  It has been hypothesized that the Indian decimal place value system was based on the symbols used on Chinese counting boards from as early as the middle of the first millennium BCE.[62] According to Plofker,[60]  These counting boards, like the Indian counting pits, ..., had a decimal place value structure ... Indians may well have learned of these decimal place value "rod numerals" from Chinese Buddhist pilgrims or other travelers, or they may have developed the concept independently from their earlier non-place-value system; no documentary evidence survives to confirm either conclusion."[62]",
Classical period (400–1300): "This period is often known as the golden age of Indian Mathematics. This period saw mathematicians such as Aryabhata, Varahamihira, Brahmagupta, Bhaskara I, Mahavira, Bhaskara II, Madhava of Sangamagrama and Nilakantha Somayaji give broader and clearer shape to many branches of mathematics. Their contributions would spread to Asia, the Middle East, and eventually to Europe. Unlike Vedic mathematics, their works included both astronomical and mathematical contributions. In fact, mathematics of that period was included in the 'astral science' (jyotiḥśāstra) and consisted of three sub-disciplines: mathematical sciences (gaṇita or tantra), horoscope astrology (horā or jātaka) and divination (saṃhitā).[53] This tripartite division is seen in Varāhamihira's 6th century compilation—Pancasiddhantika[69] (literally panca, "five", siddhānta, "conclusion of deliberation", dated 575 CE)—of five earlier works, Surya Siddhanta, Romaka Siddhanta, Paulisa Siddhanta, Vasishtha Siddhanta and Paitamaha Siddhanta, which were adaptations of still earlier works of Mesopotamian, Greek, Egyptian, Roman and Indian astronomy. As explained earlier, the main texts were composed in Sanskrit verse, and were followed by prose commentaries.[53]  Fourth to sixth centuries edit Surya Siddhanta Though its authorship is unknown, the Surya Siddhanta (c. 400) contains the roots of modern trigonometry.[citation needed] Because it contains many words of foreign origin, some authors consider that it was written under the influence of Mesopotamia and Greece.[70][better source needed]  This ancient text uses the following as trigonometric functions for the first time:[citation needed]  Sine (Jya). Cosine (Kojya). Inverse sine (Otkram jya). Later Indian mathematicians such as Aryabhata made references to this text, while later Arabic and Latin translations were very influential in Europe and the Middle East.  Chhedi calendar This Chhedi calendar (594) contains an early use of the modern place-value Hindu–Arabic numeral system now used universally.",
"In the 7th century, two separate fields, arithmetic (which included measurement) and algebra, began to emerge in Indian mathematics. The two fields would later be called pāṭī-gaṇita (literally "mathematics of algorithms") and bīja-gaṇita (lit. "mathematics of seeds", with "seeds"—like the seeds of plants—representing unknowns with the potential to generate, in this case, the solutions of equations).[72] Brahmagupta, in his astronomical work Brāhma Sphuṭa Siddhānta (628 CE), included two chapters (12 and 18) devoted to these fields. Chapter 12, containing 66 Sanskrit verses, was divided into two sections: "basic operations" (including cube roots, fractions, ratio and proportion, and barter) and "practical mathematics" (including mixture, mathematical series, plane figures, stacking bricks, sawing of timber, and piling of grain).[73] In the latter section, he stated his famous theorem on the diagonals of a cyclic quadrilateral",
"Also in chapter 18, Brahmagupta was able to make progress in finding (integral) solutions of Pell's equation,[76]    "..." where  N {\displaystyle N} is a nonsquare integer. He did this by discovering the following identity:[76]  Brahmagupta's Identity:    "..." which was a generalisation of an earlier identity of Diophantus:[76] Brahmagupta used his identity to prove the following lemma:[76]",
"Mahavira Acharya (c. 800–870) from Karnataka, the last of the notable Jain mathematicians, lived in the 9th century and was patronised by the Rashtrakuta king Amoghavarsha. He wrote a book titled Ganit Saar Sangraha on numerical mathematics, and also wrote treatises about a wide range of mathematical topics. These include the mathematics of:  Zero", "Historian of mathematics Florian Cajori wrote that he and others "suspect that Diophantus got his first glimpse of algebraic knowledge from India".[97] He also wrote that "it is certain that portions of Hindu mathematics are of Greek origin".[98]", "however, it is not known with certainty whether the immediate predecessors of Newton and Leibniz, "including, in particular, Fermat and Roberval, [may have] learned of some of the ideas of the Islamic and Indian mathematicians through sources we are not now aware."[71] This is an area of current research, especially in the manuscript collections of Spain and Maghreb, and is being pursued, among other places, at the CNRS.[71]";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Jainism : "Jain Dharma,[2] is an Indian religion which teaches a path toward spiritual purity and enlightenment through disciplined non-violence (ahimsa) to all living creatures. The tradition is spiritually guided by twenty-four tirthankaras (ford-makers), supreme teachers who have conquered the cycle of rebirth and attained omniscience (kevala jnana). The core of Jain philosophy is established on three ethical pillars: ahiṃsā (nonviolence), anekāntavāda (non-absolutism or many-sided reality), and aparigraha (non-possession). While its ultimate spiritual goal is moksha (liberation from karma), these ethical principles have historically fostered a community renowned for its high literacy, trusted role in commerce, and distinct intellectual culture.  Jain philosophy distinguishes itself through the doctrine of anekāntavāda, which asserts that truth and reality are complex and always have multiple aspects; thus, no single viewpoint can claim absolute truth. This framework encourages intellectual humility and conflict resolution, contrasting with the "one-sided" (ekānta) views rejected by the tradition. Ethically, the vow of aparigraha (non-attachment) requires monks to renounce all property, while encouraging laypersons to limit their possessions and voluntarily limit their desires (iccha-parimana). Historically, the application of non-violence drove the Jain community away from agriculture and warfare toward trade and banking, where they became a dominant mercantile force in ancient and medieval India, supporting a vast network of temples, libraries, and charitable institutions.  The tradition views itself as eternal, with the tirthankaras guiding every cosmic time cycle. In the current cycle, the first tirthankara was Rishabhanatha, credited in tradition with establishing civilized society. The 23rd tirthankara, Pārśvanātha, is dated by historians to the c. 8th or 7th century BCE, making him likely the earliest historical figure of the tradition. The 24th and final tirthankara, Mahavira c. 6th or 5th century BCE, was a contemporary of the Buddha and a central figure in the Śramaṇa movement of Greater Magadha, which rejected the authority of the Vedas and established the current ascetic order.[3][4]", "Jainism is an ancient Indian religion of obscure origins.", "Mahāvīra is considered a contemporary of the Buddha, in around the sixth or 5th century BCE.[134][135] The interaction between the two religions began with the Buddha;[136] later, they competed for followers and the merchant trade networks that sustained them.[137][138] Buddhist and Jain texts sometimes have the same or similar titles but present different doctrines.[139]";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/History_of_Jainism : "Jainism is an ancient Indian religion belonging to the Śramaṇa tradition. Jains trace their history through a lineage of twenty-four tirthankaras (ford-makers), revering Rishabhanatha as the first in the present time-cycle. While tradition considers the dharma eternal, scholarly consensus places its verifiable historical roots in the 9th–8th century BCE, with the last two tirthankaras, Parshvanatha (c. 9th-8th c. BCE) and Mahāvīra (c. 6th c. BCE), widely accepted as historical figures. Mahāvīra is viewed by scholars not as a founder, but as a reformer of the pre-existing community established by Parshvanatha.",
"Following Mahāvīra's nirvana (c. 527 BCE, the start of the Vira Nirvana Samvat era), Jainism spread across India.",
"Udayagiri Caves (Madhya Pradesh) and Deogarh (Uttar Pradesh) show continued prosperity under the Guptas (c. 4th-6th c. CE).  The Classical Age (c. 7th–13th c. CE) saw significant patronage, particularly in the Deccan under dynasties like the Chalukyas, Rashtrakutas, and Western Gangas, leading to the creation of major literary works (Adi Purana) and monuments like the Gommateshwara statue at Shravanabelagola. In Western India, the Chaulukyas were notable patrons, supporting scholars like Hemachandra and ministers who built the Dilwara Temples. The gradual schism between the two main sects, Digambara and Śvētāmbara, likely began around the 1st century CE and was solidified by the 5th century CE, primarily over differences in ascetic practices (nudity) and scriptural authority.  From the 12th century onwards, Jainism faced challenges due to the rise of competing devotional movements like Lingayatism and persecution during Mughal Empire, leading to the destruction of some temples. However, the community showed resilience, adapting as mercantile classes and influencing rulers like Emperor Akbar, who, advised by the Śvetāmbara monk Hiravijaya, temporarily banned animal slaughter during Paryushana.",
"Recent scholarship, notably by Indologists like Johannes Bronkhorst, situates the origins of Jainism within the cultural sphere of "Greater Magadha" (modern Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh), distinct from the Vedic culture of western India.[1] In this region, concepts such as karma, rebirth (samsara), and ahimsa (non-violence) evolved as indigenous beliefs of the Śramaṇa (ascetic) movements before the arrival of Vedic Brahmanism.[2][3][4] Unlike the Vedic tradition, which focused on sacrifices (yajna) to appease deities, the Śramaṇa traditions—including Jainism, Buddhism, and Ājīvika—emphasized individual effort, austerity (tapas), and the internal search for liberation (moksha).[3][4][5]  The Atharvaveda (Book 15) describes a distinct group of ascetics known as the Vratyas, who existed on the fringes of Vedic society in the Magadha region.[6][7][8] Unlike the Vedic priests, the Vratyas did not perform fire sacrifices (agnihotra) and traveled in groups.[8] Scholars like Ramaprasad Chanda and D.R. Bhandarkar have identified the Vratyas as the proto-Jain or indigenous Śramaṇa lineage that predates Mahavira, the 24th tirthankara.[6][7][8] The Vratyas are described as standing still for long periods in a posture resembling the Jain Kayotsarga (standing meditation), and their leader is referred to as the Ekavratya or Arhant, terms later central to Jain theology.[6][7] Indologist J.C. Heesterman suggests that the Vratya tradition represents the 'pre-classical' roots of the renouncer movements, providing the cultural bridge between the earlier Indus Valley civilization and the later historical Jain sangha.[9]",
"Jain tradition posits a lineage of 24 tirthankaras who guide humanity across cosmic time cycles.[11] While scholarly consensus traces verifiable historical roots to the 9th–8th century BCE,[12][13] the narratives of the earlier tirthankaras contain significant overlaps with Vedic and Epic literature, suggesting deep antiquity.[14]  Some scholars hypothesize that Jain practices originated in the Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC), pointing to seals depicting figures in meditative postures resembling kayotsarga and bull motifs associated with Rishabhanatha, the first tirthankara.[15][16][17][18][19][20] Rishabhanatha is also mentioned in the Rig Veda and Bhagavata Purana as an Avadhuta king, Rishabha, who renounced his kingdom.[21][22][23][24][25][a]  The 20th tirthankara, Munisuvrata, is traditionally placed as a contemporary of Rama.[28] Jain versions of the epic, such as the Paumacariya, depict the narrative through a Jain lens, emphasizing non-violence over martial valor.[28]  The 22nd tirthankara, Neminatha, is traditionally linked as a cousin of Krishna, sharing the Yadava lineage of Saurashtra.[29][30][11][31] Some historians connect him with "Ghora Angirasa", a teacher mentioned in the Chandogya Upanishad who taught Krishna the principle of ahimsa, suggesting a historical interaction between the Jain and Vedic traditions.[29][30][11][32]",
"Parshvanatha (c. 9th–8th century BCE), the 23rd tirthankara, is the earliest Jain leader widely accepted by scholars as a historical figure.[33][34][35][36] Born in Varanasi,[37] his historicity establishes Jainism as a distinct pre-Buddhist Śramaṇa tradition.[33][34][35][36] Historical analysis suggests his teachings formed the basis for the Chaturyama Dharma (Four-fold Restraint): non-violence, truth, non-stealing, and non-possession.[38][39][40] Traditional accounts place his liberation (moksha) atop Mount Sammeda (now Sammed Shikharji), which remains a site of paramount importance in Jain pilgrimage.[41][42]",
"For the next 30 years, he traveled extensively through the Ganges basin, teaching the path to liberation.[72] His liberation (moksha) is traditionally held to have occurred at Pawapuri (also in Bihar), an event marking the beginning of the Jain Vira Nirvana Samvat calendar era.[73][74][75] The night of his nirvana are commemorated by Jains as Diwali at the same time that Hindus celebrate it.[75][76]  His chief disciple, Indrabhuti Gautama, is said to have attained omniscience the night that Mahavira achieved nirvana from Pawapuri.[77] Following Mahavira's death, leadership of the Jain community passed to his ganadhara (chief disciple) Sudharmaswami (d. 600 BCE).[78] He is traditionally regarded as the head of the sangha from whom the entire historical monastic lineage is traced.[78] He was succeeded by Jambuswami (d. 463 BCE) who is regarded as the last omniscient being by Jain traditions.[78] Traditional Jain accounts also name early kings of the Haryanka dynasty, such as Bimbisara, Ajatashatru and Udayin, as patrons, though external historical verification for this varies.[79]",
"The Barli Inscription, discovered in 1912 and dated to the 2nd or 1st century BCE, is interpreted by some scholars as a Jain dedication, marking the religion's early spread into western India.[86][85][87]",
"Western Interactions: The Gymnosophists edit The Gymnosophists Greek accounts from the campaign of Alexander the Great (326 BCE) provide the earliest Western descriptions of Jain ascetics, whom they termed Gymnosophists ("Naked Philosophers").[110][111] The Greeks encountered a group of these ascetics in Taxila led by a sage named Dandamis (or Mandanis).[110] While Dandamis famously refused to meet Alexander, asserting his spiritual independence from any temporal conqueror, his disciple Kalanos agreed to accompany the Macedonian army to Persia.[110] While some scholars debate their sectarian identity, their strict adherence to nudity and public penance align with the Digambara monastic code.[110] Kalanos later taught Alexander the philosophy of detachment before voluntarily ending his life by immolation at Susa, an event that deeply impacted Greek Stoic philosophy.[112][113]",
"The Age of Logic & The Early South (200 CE – 600 CE) edit Following the formative era, Jainism entered a "Golden Age" of intellectual development and geographical consolidation. This period was defined by the transition from Prakrit to Sanskrit, the systematization of Jain logic to survive inter-religious debates, and the establishment of regional "subsidiaries" to localize the faith in South India.  Epigraphic Spread: South and West",
"Epigraphic evidence confirms the traditional narrative of Jainism's spread beyond Magadha.[129]  The Pugalur inscriptions (c. 2nd c. CE) near Karur, Tamil Nadu, record the construction of a rock shelter for a Jain monk by a Chera king.[130][131] Other Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions at sites like Edakkal Caves (c. 3rd c. CE) and Arachalur Musical Inscription (c. 2nd c. CE) attest to a thriving ascetic culture in the Tamil region.[132][133][134]  Jain tradition, particularly the Kalakacharya Katha (legends likely compiled 4th-10th c. CE), describes interactions with Saka (Indo-Scythian) rulers.[135][136][d] Archaeological confirmation comes from the Bava Pyara caves and Talaja Caves in Gujarat (c. 1st–4th c. CE), which show clear evidence of Jain occupation during the Saka-Kshatrapa period.[138][139] King Salivahana (late 1st century CE), associated with conflicts against the Sakas, is also mentioned in Jain legends as a patron, though this is historically uncertain.[140]  The Son Bhandar Caves in Rajgir contain inscriptions from the 3rd–4th century CE by Muni Vairadeva, confirming the site remained a center for ascetics well into the Gupta period.[141][142][143][144]  The Philosophical Synthesis edit This era produced the "Great Acharyas" whose works defined Jain metaphysics and logic, transitioning the tradition from Prakrit to Sanskrit.  Umaswati (c. 2nd–5th century CE) authored the Tattvartha Sutra ("Manifesto on the Nature of Reality").[145][146][147] It systematized Jain ontology and remains the only text accepted as authoritative by both the Digambara and Śvetāmbara traditions.[148][149][150]  Samantabhadra (c. 150–250 CE), a Digambara pontiff from the Tamil region during the time of the Cholas, was a poet, logician, and eulogist credited with spreading Jainism in the south.[151] His work Aptamimamsa defended the rationality of the tirthankaras' omniscience.[152]  Siddhasena Divakara (c. 5th century CE) formalized the rules of inference in his Nyayavatara, equipping Jain monks to debate Buddhist logicians.[153]  The Great Schism: Codification of Canons edit The divergence between the sects was institutionalized during this period through conflicting councils and literary formalization.[154][155]  Fearing the loss of oral agamas, the Śvetāmbara tradition convened the Second Council of Valabhi (c. 453 or 466 CE) in Gujarat under the patronage of the Maitraka dynasty king Dhruvasena I.[54][156][157][158][159] Presided over by Devardhigani Kshamashramana, this council committed the canon to writing.[54][156][157][158][159]  Rejecting the Valabhi canon, the Digambara tradition relies on the Shatkhandagama.[154][160][161] According to tradition, the monk Dharasena (c. 2nd century CE) summoned monks Pushpadanta and Bhutabali to his cave in Mount Girnar to transmit the remaining fragments of oral knowledge, which they compiled into sutra form.[162][163]  The split crystallized over five key disagreements: Nudity, the Liberation of Women (Stri-mukti), the Food of the Kevalin, Scripture, and Iconography.[106]" (Also mentioned transition from symbolic to image worship somewhere. Reminds me of 2026.01.10/Versed: Why The US South is Insanely Religious: 8:06 starting from 1730 to 1755, through some placed it in 1720 to 1770.
8:20 In response to those trends, ministers influenced by New England Puritanism, Scot-Irish Presbyterianism, European pietism began calling for a Revival of Religion and piety. This blending of 3 traditions would produce an evangelical Protestantism.
8:42 This movement marked a stark departure from the lore reserved religious practices of the past and it was brought to the forefront by passionate preachers like English Minister George Whitefield traversing the colonies and Jonathan Edwards, preacher from New England.
9:50 Evangelical Protestant preachers spread their religion beyond traditional  barriers of class and race. This lead to this Old-/New Lights divide.
9:57 This shift toward emotive spirituality was controversial leading to significant divisions within the religious communities.
10:05 The Great Awakening gave rise to two distinct groups: Old Lights: -Traditional style of worship -Did not agree with revivals -Against sensational styles of preaching
New Lights:-Felt religious message had run away -Emotional, powerful, sensational sermons -Spread revivals throughout the colonies This all relates to the modern-day divide.
Puritans, Baptists, Presbyterians from Old Lights rejected the revival movement as theatrical experience. South is religious because they adapted modern marketing as the New Light.),
"Metaphysics and the "Bridge" Sects edit As the schism hardened, distinct intellectual identities emerged.[154]  Acharya Kundakunda (dates vary, c. 2nd–8th century CE)[166][167][151][168] defined the sect's identity through works like the Samayasara, emphasizing the absolute standpoint (nischaya naya) of the soul's purity.[166] This lineage was expanded by Pujyapada (c. 5th–6th century CE), a grammarian and philosopher.[169][170]  A third major sect, the Yapaniya, flourished in the Deccan (Karnataka) from the 5th to the 14th century.[171][172] Inscriptions from the Kadamba dynasty (c. 4th–6th century CE) at sites like Halasi confirm royal grants to this order.[172][173][174] They practiced nudity but accepted Śvetāmbara scriptures and advocated for the spiritual liberation of women.[175] They eventually merged into the Digambara tradition, leaving a legacy visible in the specific rituals of Karnataka's Jain temples today.[176]  Material Culture: Art and Temples", "Jainism received significant patronage during the Gupta Empire (c. 4th-6th c. CE), evidenced by a 425 CE inscription at Udayagiri Caves (Madhya Pradesh) recording the installation of a Parsvanatha statue during Kumaragupta I's reign.[177]  The Chausa Hoard (Bihar, c. 1st–3rd century CE) represents the earliest Jain bronzes.[178][179] By the 5th century, the Akota Hoard (Gujarat) displays distinct Śvetāmbara iconography (clothed tirthankaras).[180][181][94]  In Western India, early rock-cut activity is evident at the Dhank Caves in Gujarat (c. 4th–7th century CE).[182] The earliest structural temple complexes appear at Deogarh (Uttar Pradesh) in the 6th century.[183][184]",
"The Imperial Zenith & Bhakti Conflict (600 CE – 1000 CE) edit The period between the 8th and 13th centuries marked the zenith of Jain institutional power.[185] No longer just a community of wandering ascetics, Jainism became a religion of royal ministers, colossal monuments, and complex rituals.[185] This era saw the rise of the great temple complexes and the integration of "Tantric" elements to compete with medieval Hinduism.[185]  Jainism co-existed with Buddhism and Hinduism in ancient and medieval India. Many of its historic temples were built near Buddhist and Hindu temples in the 1st millennium CE.[186] The Jain and Hindu communities have often been very close and mutually accepting. Some Hindu temples have included a Jain Tirthankara within its premises in a place of honour.[187][188] Similarly numerous temple complexes feature both Hindu and Jain monuments, with Badami cave temples and Khajuraho among some of the most well known.[189][190]  Evidence for a widespread Jain community is also found in material culture, such as the Hansi hoard (Haryana, c. 8th-9th c. CE), which contained numerous Jain bronze images.[191]  During the subsequent Gurjara-Pratihara period (c. 8th–11th century CE), Jainism became deeply embedded in the mercantile ethos of Rajasthan.[192] Towns such as Osian became major centers, with the famous Mahavira Temple (built by the Pratihara king Vatsaraja in 783 CE) serving as the cradle of the Oswal merchant community.[192] Archaeological evidence from this era, including the Vasantgarh Hoard (687 CE) and the Hansi Hoard, demonstrates that Jain merchant guilds possessed significant wealth and political influence in the Pratihara feudal structure long before the rise of the Chaulukya dynasty (c. 950–1300 CE).[193]  The Digambara South: Rashtrakutas and Gangas"
"Early Western Chalukya patronage is exemplified by the Meguti Jain temple at Aihole (7th c.), whose inscription was composed by the Jain poet Ravikirti in honor of Pulakeshin II.[194][195][196][197][198] Further Chalukya patronage led to the dedication of Badami cave temple 4, the earliest major Jain rock-cut temple in the Deccan, around the 7th century.[199]  Rashtrakuta dynasty (c. 8th-10th c.) presided over a golden age for Deccan Jainism.[200][201] Many rulers were inclined towards Jainism, supporting scholars like Virasena and Jinasena (authors of the Dhavala and Adipurana respectively) and mathematicians like Mahaviracharya.[202] King Amoghavarsha I was particularly noted for his Jain leanings.[203] Kumudendu Muni, in his writing Siribhoovalaya, claims to be the spirititual teacher of Amoghavarsha and Shivamara II.[203][204] This patronage culminated architecturally in the excavation of the elaborate Jain caves (Caves 30-34) at the UNESCO site of Ellora, including the famous Indra Sabha.[205][206] This pattern of adding new Jain excavations to older religious sites is also seen at the Nasik Caves, where new Jain caves were excavated under Rashtrakuta patronage in the 9th century.[207] The Dharashiv Caves in Maharashtra also belong to this period of Rashtrakuta influence.[208][209]",
"Loyal feudatories of the Rashtrakutas, the Western Gangas were staunch patrons, particularly evident in the construction of monuments at Shravanabelagola and Kambadahalli.[210] Minister Chavundaraya commissioned the colossal Gommateshwara statue (consecrated 981 CE).[211] The earlier ruler Shivamara I also built numerous basadis.[212]  In the Andhra region, sites like the Undavalli Caves show a complex history, with scholars suggesting an early Jain or Buddhist foundation (c. 4th-5th c. CE) before their later conversion to Hindu use.[213]"
"Flourishing in Southern and Western India":
"Further south, Jainism flourished under Pandya patronage around the 8th-9th centuries in Tamil Nadu.[citation needed] This era saw the creation of the renowned Jain murals at Sittanavasal Cave, the extensive rock-cut reliefs at Kalugumalai, the numerous inscriptions and reliefs at Samanar Hills near Madurai, and the Jain temple and paintings at Armamalai cave.[214][215] Later sites like Thirakoil (c. 8th c.) and Tirumalai demonstrate continuity with Chola-era paintings and large sculptures.[216]  This architectural development was accompanied by other forms of material culture.[217] The Akota and Vasantgarh bronze hoards, with images dating from the 5th to 11th centuries, demonstrate a continuous tradition of metal casting.[217] Furthermore, the shastra bhandars (libraries) of Gujarat from this period preserved the earliest surviving examples of illuminated Jain palm-leaf manuscripts, which are a primary source for the Svetambara" (traditional) "textual and artistic tradition.[citation needed]" (Many citations needed.),
"Ritual Transformation: Tantra and Goddesses edit Between the 6th and 10th centuries, Jainism underwent a significant ritual transformation to compete with the rising popularity of Shaiva and Buddhist esoteric traditions.[218] While retaining the core vegetarian ethos, Jain monks incorporated Mantra-vada (the path of spells) and Yantra rituals, fundamentally altering the lay practice.[218]  This period saw the elevation of Sasanadevis (Guardian Goddesses) such as Padmāvatī, Ambika, and Jwalamalini.[219] The Digambara text Jvalamalini-kalpa, composed by Indranandi in 939 CE under Rashtrakuta patronage, codified rituals for worldly goals—such as subduing rivals and curing disease.[219][220] Later, the Svetambara text Bhairava-Padmavati-Kalpa (c. 11th century) further systematized the worship of Padmavati, blending Jain ethics with Tantric methodology.[219][221] Historian Paul Dundas notes that this Tantricization provided a necessary "spiritual safety valve," allowing the lay community to seek worldly protection within the Jain fold rather than converting to other faiths.[222]  The Vedantic Revival and Philosophical Competition edit According to Jain texts, some of the Hindu gods are blood relatives of legendary tirthankara. Neminatha, the 22nd tirthankara for example is a cousin of Krishna in Jain Puranas and other texts.[223] However, Jain scholars such as Haribhadra also wrote satires about Hindu gods, mocking them with novel outrageous stories where the gods misbehave and act unethically.[224][225] The Hindu gods are recorded by some Jain writers as persecuting, tempting, afraid of, or serving a legendary Jina before he gains omniscience. In other stories, the Hindu deities such as Vishnu, or Rama and Sita come to pay respect to a Jina at a major Jain pilgrimage site such as Mount Satrunjaya and Mount Sammed Shikhar Ji.[226] The languid Hindu scholars rewrote the original pre historic stories into their Hindu versions. According to Paul Dundas, these satires were aimed at the Hindu lay householder community, were means to inculcate piety and subvert the actual religious teachings offered by their Jain neighbors.[224]" (Religious sabotaging each other.),
"True to their origins, Buddhist and Hindu scholars engaged in creating similar satire, mythology and parody-filled fiction targeting the Jains and each other.[227] The emergence of major philosophical ideas within Hinduism impacted Jainism. According to a 1925 publication by von Glasenapp, around the 8th century CE, Adi Shankara brought forward the doctrine of Advaita, and either converted Jain temples to Hindu ones or completely destroyed them.[228] The traditions of Vaishnavism and Shaivism also began to emerge. This, states von Glasenapp, contributed to a decline of "Jaina church", particularly in South India.[229]",
"The Merchant-State & Marble Age (1000 CE – 1300 CE) edit The Rise of Guilds and Western Dominance edit The rapid expansion of Jainism during the Classical Age was driven by a symbiotic relationship between the monastic community (Sangha) and powerful merchant guilds (Srenis).[230] In Western and Southern India, Jain merchants came to dominate trans-regional trade networks, such as the Vira Banaju and Nanadesi guilds.[230] Epigraphic evidence reveals that these guilds frequently levied voluntary taxes (cess) on goods—such as betel leaves, textiles, and precious stones—specifically to fund temple construction and monastic libraries (Bhandaras).[230]  This economic autonomy translated into immense political leverage, giving rise to the era of the "Merchant-Ministers" (Mantris).[231] The most prominent examples were the brothers Vastupala and Tejapala (ministers to the Vaghela court) and the 13th-century shipping magnate Jagadu Shah.[231][232] These figures utilized their personal wealth to finance state defenses and public works, effectively establishing Jainism as a state-protected religion without needing a Jain monarch on the throne.[231] Historian Kanakalatha Mukund notes that this 'Temple Economy' allowed Jain institutions to act as stabilizing financial hubs during feudal conflicts.[231]", "In Gujarat and Rajasthan, this mercantile patronage fueled the "Marble Age," a period characterized by Maru-Gurjara architecture noted for its intricate carving.[233][234]",
"Further consolidating this religious infrastructure, the Chaulukya dynasty oversaw the transformation of the Shatrunjaya hill at Palitana into a massive "city of temples" and the expansion of the ancient site of Girnar, solidifying the region's status as a primary pilgrimage network (tirtha).[236][237] This had been noted by the 7th-century Chinese traveler Xuanzang.[238]  Other dynasties in the region, such as the Shilahara dynasty (c. 8th–13th century) which ruled the Konkan coast, also served as key patrons, funding temples throughout Maharashtra.[239][240]",
"The influence of the merchant community extended well beyond the west, creating a pan-Indian network of artistic patronage.[241] In the Bundelkhand region of Central India, the Chandela rulers commissioned the Jain temples at Khajuraho (10th–11th century), which share the distinct architectural style of their Hindu counterparts.[241][242][243]";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Nirvana : "Nirvana,[note 1] in the Indian religions (Jainism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Sikhism), is the concept of an individual's passions being extinguished as the ultimate state of salvation, release, or liberation from suffering (duḥkha) and from the cycle of birth and rebirth (saṃsāra).[3][4][5]  Translations of Nirvana English freedom, liberation, enlightenment";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Sangha : "Saṅgha or saṃgha (IPA: [sɐŋɡʱɐ]) is a term meaning "association", "assembly", "company" or "community". In a political context, it was historically used to denote a governing assembly in a republic or a kingdom, and for a long time, it has been used by religious associations, including Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs. Given this history, some Buddhists have stated that the tradition of the sangha represents humanity's oldest surviving democratic institution.[3]",
"In Buddhism, sangha refers to the monastic communities of bhikkhu (monks) and bhikkhuni (nuns). These communities are traditionally referred to as the bhikkhu-sangha or the bhikkhuni-sangha. As a separate category, those Buddhists who have attained any of the four stages of enlightenment, whether or not they are members of the monastic community, are referred to as the āryasaṅgha ("noble Sangha").[4][5]" (Connection between being enlightened internationally, European enlightenment in year 1759, aristocracy, 20st-early-21st-century Iron Law Of Oligarchy, and Aristotle's perfect government being aristocracy.);
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Sudharmaswami : "Sudharman; 607 BC – 507 BC) was the fifth ganadhara of Mahavira. All the current Jain acharyas and monks follow his rule.";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Diophantus : "Arithmetica[6] created a foundation for work on algebra and in fact much of advanced mathematics is based on algebra.[15] Diophantus and his works influenced mathematics in the medieval Islamic world, and editions of Arithmetica exerted a profound influence on the development of algebra in Europe in the late sixteenth and through the 17th and 18th centuries.[16]", "Medieval era edit Like many other Greek mathematical treatises, Diophantus was forgotten in Western Europe during the Dark Ages, since the study of ancient Greek, and literacy in general, had greatly declined. The portion of the Greek Arithmetica that survived, however, was, like all ancient Greek texts transmitted to the early modern world, copied by, and thus known to, medieval Byzantine scholars. Scholia on Diophantus by the Byzantine Greek scholar John Chortasmenos (1370–1437) are preserved together with a comprehensive commentary written by the earlier Greek scholar Maximos Planudes (1260 – 1305), who produced an edition of Diophantus within the library of the Chora Monastery in Byzantine Constantinople.[20]  Arithmetica became known to mathematicians in the Islamic world in the ninth century, when Qusta ibn Luqa translated it into Arabic.[21]  In 1463 German mathematician Regiomontanus wrote: "No one has yet translated from the Greek into Latin the thirteen books of Diophantus, in which the very flower of the whole of arithmetic lies hidden." Arithmetica was first translated from Greek into Latin by Bombelli in 1570, but the translation was never published. However, Bombelli borrowed many of the problems for his own book Algebra. The editio princeps of Arithmetica was published in 1575 by Xylander." (His influence-section and the article about Diophantus as a whole never mentioned India. It even struggled to influence Latin Rome. Entered Arabic world in ninth century.);
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Mathematics_in_the_medieval_Islamic_world : "Mathematics during the Golden Age of Islam, especially during the 9th and 10th centuries, was built upon syntheses of Greek mathematics (Euclid, Archimedes, Apollonius) and Indian mathematics (Aryabhata, Brahmagupta)." (Brahmagupta being the big mathematician meanwhile Diophantus isn't.),
"The medieval Islamic world underwent significant developments in mathematics. Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwārizmī played a key role in this transformation, introducing algebra as a distinct field in the 9th century. Al-Khwārizmī's approach, departing from earlier arithmetical traditions, laid the groundwork for the arithmetization of algebra, influencing mathematical thought for an extended period. Successors like Al-Karaji expanded on his work, contributing to advancements in various mathematical domains. The practicality and broad applicability of these mathematical methods facilitated the dissemination of Arabic mathematics to the West, contributing substantially to the evolution of Western mathematics.[2]  Arabic mathematical knowledge spread through various channels during the medieval era, driven by the practical applications of Al-Khwārizmī's methods. This dissemination was influenced not only by economic and political factors but also by cultural exchanges, exemplified by events such as the Crusades and the translation movement. The Islamic Golden Age, spanning from the 8th to the 14th century, marked a period of considerable advancements in various scientific disciplines, attracting scholars from medieval Europe seeking access to this knowledge. Trade routes and cultural interactions played a crucial role in introducing Arabic mathematical ideas to the West. The translation of Arabic mathematical texts, along with Greek and Roman works, during the 14th to 17th century, played a pivotal role in shaping the intellectual landscape of the Renaissance.", "Al-Khwārizmī's approach was groundbreaking in that it did not arise from any previous "arithmetical" tradition, including that of Diophantus. He developed a new vocabulary for algebra, distinguishing between purely algebraic terms and those shared with arithmetic. Al-Khwārizmī noticed that the representation of numbers is crucial in daily life. Thus, he wanted to find or summarize a way to simplify the mathematical operation, so-called later, the algebra.[3]",
"In the twelfth century, Latin translations of Al-Khwarizmi's Arithmetic on the Indian numerals introduced the decimal positional number system to the Western world.[19] His Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing presented the first systematic solution of linear and quadratic equations. In Renaissance Europe, he was considered the original inventor of algebra, although it is now known that his work is based on older Indian or Greek sources.[20][21]";
2026.04.11/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Indian_influence_on_Islamic_science : "sin and cos functions of trigonometry, were important mathematical concepts, imported from the Gupta period of Indian astronomy namely the jyā and koṭi-jyā functions via translation of texts like the Aryabhatiya and Surya Siddhanta, from Sanskrit to Arabic, and then from Arabic to Latin, and later to other European languages.[10]  Al-Khowarizmi (ca. 840) contributed a work on algebra and an account of the Hindu—Arabic numerals including the use of zero as a place-holder...the history of early Hindu mathematics has always presented considerable problems for the West...it is still not possible to form a clear picture of either method or motivation in Hindu mathematics...this, together with the absence of any formalised proof structure, militated against continuous mathematical development...much of the Hindu approach to mathematics was certainly conveyed to western Europe through Arabs. The Algebraic method formerly considered to have been invented by Al Khowarizimi can now be seen to stem from Hindu sources. The place-value system involving the use of nine numerals and a zero as place-holder is undoubtedly of Hindu origin and its transmission to the West had a profound influence on the whole course of mathematics.[11] As in the rest of mathematical science so in Trigonometry, were the Arabs pupils of the Hindus and still more of the Greeks, but not without important devices of their own.[12] For over five hundred years Arabic writers and others continued to apply to works on arithmetic the name Indian.[13] Another important early treatise that publicized decimal numbers was the Iranian mathematician and astronomer Kushyar ibn Labban's leading arithmetic book Kitab fi usul hisab al-hind (principals of Hindu reckoning).[14] Abu'l-Hasan al-Uqlidisi a scholar in the Abbasid caliphate wrote al-Fusul fi al-Hisab al-Hindi ("chapters in Indian calculation") to address the difficulty in procedures for calculation from the Euclid's Elements and endorsed the use of Indian calculation. He highlighted its ease of use, speed, fewer requirements of memory and the focused scope on the subject.[15]";
p.178: "Indian and Arab mathematicians also made substantial progress in algebra during the last half of the first millennium, at a time when little progress was being made in the other sciences.",
 ;
Charles Murray's 2003 pdf: "Brahmagupta 638", [p.241: "Invention of Meditation. India, culminating circa –200."], "India", p.563: Japanese Art: "Tori Busshi" 620, p.572: Arabic Literature: pre-Islamic Arabic poets such as earliest "Imru’ al-Qays" & "Ta’abbata Sharran" in 530., p.576: Indian Literature: Vyasa -400, p.578: "Otomo no Tabito" 66, p.602: Indian Philosophy: "Carvaka (Lokayata)" -600; China.;
Least Greek-influenced Geniuses:a]
p.641: "Criticism of Western culture became even stronger in the 1960s and there- after than it had been before, but the criticism came from a new direction. The earlier conservative declinists such as Spengler and Toynbee had valued Western civilization and saw its decay. In the 1960s and thereafter, a new generation of leftist scholars despised Western civilization" because 2x multi-corporations, 1x mindless consumerism, 1x globalization...."before the new criticism came along. The ascendancy of the postmodernists compounded their gloom. The traditional repository for the best of Western civilization, the university, had been over- run by sophists and intellectual children heedless of the heritage they were destroying. Thus historian Gertrude Himmelfarb chose the title On Looking into the Abyss for her critique of postmodernism (Himmelfarb 1994).";
2025.03.16/plato.stanford .edu/entries/religious-commitment-reason/ : "Religious commitment, let us say, is exemplified by all and only those who intentionally join in the practices of some such tradition or way of life, positively engaging with its thought-forms and structuring their lives by its goals—goals such as awakening to the Buddha-nature or realizing the character of Christ or alignment with what’s ultimately real (cf. Audi 2011: 8–9). “Positive engagement with religious thought-forms” will often enough involve belief of religious propositions. But it need not do so: religious commitment is often sustained through periods when the religious are in doubt about the truth of religious propositions and sometimes is even entered into in that mode—here consider those whose positive emotional response to religion is strong enough to offset intellectual concerns, or the pragmatic choosing of such a commitment by some religious skeptics. Philosophers have recently noticed this fact and analyzed it in terms of such propositional alternatives to believing as accepting (Alston 1996), trusting (Audi 2011), and assuming (Howard-Snyder 2013). Whatever the worth of their analyses, the fact is clear. And so propositional religious belief should not be made a requirement of religious commitment.
A similar point applies to faith. A devoted Buddhist or Taoist or Hindu might or might not exhibit religious faith, but surely does evince religious commitment. The notion of commitment is the more fundamental, religiously.", "broadly still, stretching “some such” in the expression “some such tradition or way of life” to the point where commitments quite dissimilar to those ordinarily called religious, such as the commitment of the fictionalist, who has decided to treat religion like a particularly engrossing novel, or of the dedicated nature-lover, or even that of the activist or the positive thinker, may count as religious given strong enough attendant fervor or perhaps a special grandeur of conception. With such stretching one might easily locate instances of religious commitment that no one would find rationally problematic.";
2025.03.14/creativitypost .com/article/where_have_all_the_geniuses_gone : "genius emerged in the 18th century as a model of the highest human type is an interesting question. Scholars have suggested a number of explanations, ranging from the advent of capitalism to new notions of aesthetics to new understandings of the author and the self. I would add religious change—the "withdrawal of God," to quote the philosopher Marcel Gauchet—and a decline in the belief in supernatural beings like angels and saints, which had long served to mediate between the human and the divine.", "related, and somewhat surprising, context was a growing belief in human equality, which provided a foil to the allegedly natural differences that distinguished human beings. In societies increasingly reluctant to treat noble birth and privilege as a legitimate basis for establishing social hierarchies, intelligence and creativity served as new criteria to justify human distinction, with the genius singled out as a member of what contemporaries (including Thomas Jefferson) called a "natural aristocracy."
What, precisely, were the traits that distinguished these exceptional men? (Genius was treated as exclusively male at the start.)", Men of letters., "rise of Romanticism, in the early 19th century, intensified the speculation, while laying bare, as Isaac D'Israeli (father of the British prime minister) put it, the Literary Character of Men of Genius (1828), highlighting the eccentricities, habits, and traits that set these special beings apart.", "genius was not the consequence of a divine infusion—the inspiring breath of an angel, muse, or God—it must be resident in the body or soul. Was genius contingent upon good blood and a favorable climate, as some believed? Or was it a "certain conformation of the head and the viscera," as Diderot surmised?
Such possibilities were pursued well into the 20th century. Physiognomists tried to detect genius in the folds of the face; phrenologists looked for it in bumps on the head; craniometrists tried to grasp it with calipers; and in places like Göttingen and Paris, researchers amassed weighty collections of brains and skulls, prompting one French skeptic to note that if size alone determined intelligence, the whale would be lord of us all.", "Meanwhile, eugenicists and psychologists built on the foundation laid by Francis Galton in his monumental 1869 study, Hereditary Genius, and attempted to create instruments to identify genius among the races. Particularly in the wake of the development of the intelligence quotient (IQ), in the early 20th century, and the British psychologist Charles Spearman's theory about an underlying (and inborn) general factor of intelligence (the so-called "g-factor"), hereditarians dreamed of screening for genius on a mass scale while weeding out the unfit. The matter was deemed crucial to human welfare. As Lewis Terman, an American psychologist and acolyte of Galton who was instrumental in adapting the IQ exam for widespread use, emphasized in the introduction to his multivolume Genetic Studies of Genius, in 1925", "Hitler, who skillfully and self-consciously presented himself as a genius—a trope that figures in Nazi propaganda from early on. Joseph Goebbels claimed to have known from his first encounter with Hitler that he was a "genius," "a natural, creative instrument of divine fate," who would shape the German Volk into a political-artistic masterpiece. "The people are for the statesman what stone is for the sculptor," Goebbels observed in his novel Michael, first published in the 1920s. "Geniuses use up people. That is just the way it is.""Scientists acknowledge Einstein as genius of genius, the last titan., "widespread adherence with the expansion of industrial research and development. Modern marvels like the "idea factory" at Bell Laboratories, which at its height employed close to 1,200 Ph.D.'s, underscored the point with a succession of stunning innovations and Nobel Prizes.", Both bourgeoises & academics concluded that many researchers are better & more realistic than one exceptional hero., "Europeans and especially Americans had long spoken of genius not only as a rarefied power, but also as an individual talent or bent.", "genius has largely vanished as a topic of academic research while exploding as a pop-culture trope points to an underlying connection. For not only does research emphasizing the social underpinnings of creativity track with the broader democratization of genius since World War II, but it also, paradoxically, renders the myth of the lone creator more appealing. In a complex and interconnected world that tends by its very nature to thwart individual agency, an emphasis on the achievements of individuals is reassuring, if also a bit quaint. And so geniuses multiply in the media, while dying an ignominious death in academe.", ""excellence" (how that word has been abused) and a form of intellectual celebrity that, in practice, is not far removed from the genius of popular culture. A constellation of stars, a world of fashions, an ebb and flow of trends, a new group of MacArthur fellows.", "not so many geniuses are created in a year, and surely not so many of them reside in the United States. In a world without a genuine appreciation of genius, this is what we get—excellence by committee and blind peer review."; 2025.03.14/cambridge .org/core/books/abs/eighteenthcentury-aesthetics-and-the-reconstruction-of-art/thinking-about-genius-in-the-eighteenth-century/EFF1C93EA3684B613888A1DAE919FC6E : British historians as "“the long eighteenth century,” that is, from the Glorious Revolution of 1688 to the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, the word “genius” came to assume its modern meaning. Before this time it had referred either to a nonhuman spirit which acted as an individual's guardian, providing advice or support in the form of superhuman wisdom or strength, or to a universal spirit of generation. During this period it came to be applied to a particular kind of inventive human being whose natural talent (ingenium) made possible the outstanding achievements previously believed to have been brought about by a (or the) genius. The external or universal spirit became an individual with outstanding natural powers.
The modern concept of genius is, therefore, one aspect of that overall change in which the balance between the gods' bounty and human achievement shifted decisively toward the latter. Just as political rule came to be justified not by divine right or historical precedent but rather in terms of (more or less) democratic consent", "rise to the democratic imperative of Rousseau's Contrat social was the same as that which informed Blake's statement, “I must create a system or be enslaved by another man's.”"; 2025.03.15/hsm.stackexchange .com/questions/12636/why-we-got-so-many-geniuses-after-19th-century : "tiny percentage of persons who are geniuses didn't change.", "fraction of geniuses is constant not in the whole population but in that part of population which has access to good EDUCATION. This would explain, for example why a disproportionally large number of them comes from German speaking countries."; 2025.03.15/fs. blog/a-history-of-genius/ : "more than 2,000 years after its first recorded use by the Roman author Plautus, it continues to resonate with power and allure", create, divine the secrets of the universe, destroy. "With its hints of madness and eccentricity, sexual prowess and protean possibility, genius remains a mysterious force, bestowing on those who would assume it superhuman abilities and godlike powers. Genius, conferring privileged access to the hidden workings of the world. Genius, binding us still to the last vestiges of the divine.", "Richard Feynman sums up the situation: “No Ordinary Genius.”", "history in ideas is particularly well-suited to teasing out genius’s intimate connection to the divine, a connection that few serious analysts of the subject have explored. On the one hand, natural and social scientists since the nineteenth century have attempted to unlock genius’s secrets, to understand its nature and develop its nurture, probing the conditions that might bring it about. But in their relentless efforts to identify the many attributes of genius—and then to quantify and compare them—these researchers have tended to dismiss genius’s religious reception and appeal as so much superstition.
A very different group of scholars, on the other hand, working in the fields of literary theory, art history, and criticism, has been inclined to reject the notion of genius altogether, toppling it from the privileged place it once held as an arbiter of aesthetic distinction.", "third group of scholars, far from dismissing the religious appeal of genius, has embraced it. Writing in the 1930s, the American popular historian Will Durant noted that “in an age that would level everything and reverence nothing,” the worship of genius was the “final religion,” demanding obeisance, not critique. “When genius stands in our presence,” Durant declared, “we can only bow down before it as an act of God, a continuance of creation.” More recently, if no less reverently, the well-known critic Harold Bloom has imagined geniuses as Kabbalistic representations of God. God. “We need genius, however envious or uncomfortable it makes many among us,” Bloom affirmed. “Our desire for the transcendental and the extraordinary seems part of our common heritage, and abandons us slowly, and never completely.” Bloom is right about the stubborn desire for transcendence", "Latin, and for the ancient Romans who first used it and then bequeathed the term to us, a genius was a guardian spirit, a god of one’s birth who accompanied individuals throughout life, connecting them to the divine. The Roman genius, without question, was very far from the modern “genius,” conceived as an individual of exceptional creativity and insight. The latter understanding of the word only gained currency in the eighteenth century", "human beings invested others with mysterious powers and then bowed before them in awe. It followed that genius was invariably a “relationship” between the many and the one, a relationship that had come into being for specific historical reasons and that would, Lange-Eichbaum ventured, disappear in time. At the present moment, however, the relationship to genius was one of “semi-religious dogmatism.”", "Christians took up these and related questions in a centuries-long rumination that continued into the early modern period, adapting the language of the ancients to suit their own image of the God-man Christ and the prophets and saints who struggled to imitate his perfection. Possessed by the Holy Spirit, or lifted up by the heavenly angels, the great-souled man might aspire to be perfect as God was perfect. But how could he be sure that an angel was not a demon; that the holy ghost was not a specter, sent by Satan, to tempt him, the way Satan tempted Faust, offering the key to all knowledge in return for one’s soul? How could one be sure that those seized by higher powers were not mad, their souls stirred by dark humors and melancholy fits? Well into the Renaissance, when men like Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci sought to render God’s beauty and reproduce the perfection of his creation, these remained vital questions.", "no single notion of genius that coheres magically over time, there are coherent ways of imagining how the highest beings might appear and what a beautiful mind might entail. Those early imaginings were present at the modern genius’s birth, and they lend insight into what the genius in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries would become.
The modern genius was born in the eighteenth century—conceived, in keeping with long-standing prejudices, almost exclusively as a man. There were precedents for this birth, stretching all the way back to antiquity. But that the birth itself occurred in the bright place of deliverance we call “the Enlightenment” is clear.", "first has to do with religious change, and, more specifically, with what has been described as the “withdrawal of God,” along with the disavowal and dismissal of a range of spiritual companions—spirits and angels, prophets, apostles, and saints—who had long served human beings as guardians and mediators to the divine. That dismissal was by no means uniformly accepted. But the scale was nonetheless significant and the consequences profound. For not only did it leave men and women alone in the world with their Creator; it did so at the very moment that the Creator was appearing to many to be more distant, more remote, more withdrawn, and less likely to intervene in human affairs than he had been (or so it seemed) in earlier times. To reach the realm of the sacred, to get to God— if indeed he even existed, as an emboldened minority was inclined to wonder—was more difficult than ever before. A vast space opened up, and there were no longer helpers on hand to guide human beings across the way. It was in that space that the modern genius was conceived and born.
Thus the genius bridged the gap between people and the gods.", "Genius was a flash of light, but its brilliance served to illuminate the dark mystery that surrounded and set it apart.
Geniuses, then, were believed to possess rare and special powers: the power to create, redeem, and destroy; the power to penetrate the fabric of the universe; the power to see into the future, or to see into our souls.", "second transformation key to understanding the modern conception of genius is sociopolitical and rests on a foundation of the belief in human equality.
Widely proclaimed on both sides of the Atlantic from the end of the seventeenth century, the view, as Thomas Jefferson put it famously in the Declaration of Independence, that “all men are created equal” could pass by the end of the eighteenth century as a self-evident truth. By the middle of the century that followed, it was being hailed by astute observers such as Alexis de Tocqueville as a “providential fact,” an unstoppable force that leveled all before it. And yet the assertion of equality was qualified and challenged from the start, with whole categories of human beings singled out as exceptions to the general rule. Historians have devoted close attention to these exceptions, showing how women, people of color, Jews, and others were systematically deprived of their rights in strategies of exclusion that aimed at denying some the inherent equality granted to others. But what have received less attention are the justifications used to elevate the few above the many, granting privileges and rights beyond the norm.
Jefferson himself spoke of a “natural aristocracy,” composed of individuals of talent, creativity, and intelligence, that might replace the old aristocracy of birth and blood, and many in nineteenth-century Europe would conceive of artists in a similar fashion, as beings endowed by nature with special abilities and so entitled to special privileges. Such assertions were often linked to corresponding claims of the natural inferiority of others, and together these notions formed part of a “shadow language of inequality” that accompanied the bright proclamation of the equality of all. Modern discussions of genius were most often conducted in this idiom, serving to justify new forms of hierarchy while registering a profound protest against doctrines of universal equality. Conceived as an extreme case of inherent superiority and natural difference, the genius was imagined as an exception of the most exalted or terrible kind, able to transcend or subvert the law, and to liberate or enslave accordingly.
Genius and Celebrity; The Modern Problem
Today we often confuse the notion of genius and celebrity.", "genius is now consumed by a celebrity culture that draws few distinctions between a genius for fashion, a genius for business, and a genius for anything else. If the “problem of genius” of yesteryear was how to know and how to find it, “our genius problem” today is that it is impossible to avoid. Genius remains a relationship, but our relationship to it has changed.", "Einstein, the “genius of geniuses,” was the last of the titans. The age of the genius is gone."; 2025.03.15/historynewsnetwork .org/article/with-so-many-artistic-geniuses-among-us-why-is-mos : "English writer W. Somerset Maugham published a 1949 essay in which he pondered whether Dostoevski or El Greco was the greater artistic genius. He reluctantly came down on the side of El Greco after deciding that 16th century Spain was a more fertile environment for the flowering of inspiration than czarist Russia.", "We live in an age peopled by more artistic geniuses than in any other moment in history, though the bar is set considerably lower than in the past.
As recently as the mid-20th century, qualifying as an artistic genius meant belonging to a rarified elite--Picasso, Hemingway, Stravinsky, Pollock, Frank Lloyd Wright, Miles Davis, et al.--who created masterpieces that changed the way people thought about the world, and in the process lived existences infused with drama. But that sort of resume is no longer necessary, thanks to the evolution of pop culture and the explosive growth of media hype...
...AThough we have more supposed artistic geniuses than ever, their output, oddly, is increasingly middling. What's happened in the last couple of decades is that puffery seems to have surpassed prodigy. Here's a test: Try to think of a recently produced book, movie, poem, pop song or artwork that you could imagine being appreciated 50 or 100 years from now", "Romans believed artistic ability came from a supernatural being, the"genius," that guarded each man. The 18th century essayist Joseph Addison decided that there were two sorts of geniuses--those who'd diligently worked to learn their art, such as English poet John Milton, and the natural, untutored, compulsive virtuosity of a William Shakespeare", "developmental psychologist William Therivel, author of the three-volume treatise"The GAM/DP Theory of Personality and Creativity," has argued that genius is a combination of genetics and assistance (i.e., educational opportunities, supportive families and intellectual mentors). There's also the unexpected dash of misfortune or trauma that forces the budding wunderkind to forsake conventional beliefs, taboos and methods of problem-solving that inhibit most of us but allows him or her to see the world in a startlingly different way. The final ingredient is a social milieu in which power is divided rather than absolute, so the artist can play the iconoclast without being crushed like a bug. It results in what is called a" challenged personality," an artistically gifted person who pursues that vision with a single-minded aggressiveness that borders on antagonism.
Therivel cites Mozart, whose talented but unsuccessful musician father made sure that his son had opportunities to study in Venice and Vienna, as an example of a genius who scored high in all GAM/DP categories."; 2025.03.15/raw.githubusercontent .com/AoE-guys/AoE-SP-VERSION-DISCONTINUED-/refs/heads/master/AOE/common/issues.txt : Gentry is only class who increases research points. "research_points_modifier = 0.20" "minimum_wage = 0.30
			global_immigrant_attract = 0.25" "welfare_state = { #Philosopher Court
			min_social_spending = 0.15
			research_points_modifier = 0.15" Conquer with foreign things brings 0.25; 2025.03.15/old.reddit .com/r/victoria2/comments/sglq7d/age_of_enlightenment_16_is_out/ : Gentry increases consciousness.; raw.githubusercontent .com/MaTi5893/AoE-remake/refs/heads/main/AoE%20Multiplayer%20Remake/common/issues.txt : general unciv reforms increase research.; raw.githubusercontent .com/AoE-guys/AoE-SP-VERSION-DISCONTINUED-/master/AOE/events/2b_factions_n_politics.txt : "has_country_flag = gentry_influence_5 	, work_hours = eight_hours  					#scaled_militancy = { #ideology = liberal, #factor = +1, # conservative, #factor = -3, #scaled_militancy = {,#ideology = communist, #factor = +3", 
"has_country_flag = gentry_influence_1 	, work_hours = eight_hours  					#scaled_militancy = { #ideology = liberal, #factor = -3, # conservative = #factor = +1, #scaled_militancy = {,#ideology = communist, #factor = -1", 
"has_country_flag = gentry_influence_1 	, work_hours = no_work_hours_limit				#scaled_militancy = { #ideology = liberal, #factor = +1, # conservative = #factor = -3, #scaled_militancy = {,#ideology = communist, #factor = +3", 
"has_country_flag = gentry_influence_5 	, work_hours = no_work_hours_limit 			#scaled_militancy = { #ideology = liberal, #factor = +3, # conservative = #factor = -1, #scaled_militancy = {,#ideology = communist, #factor = +1"; raw.githubusercontent .com/AoE-guys/AoE-SP-VERSION-DISCONTINUED-/master/AOE/events/2c_factions_n_politics.txt : ""Unrest Among Middle Classes"
	desc = "Our recent actions provoked gentry to rally against us!"", influence_5, "middle_class_unrest_5 duration = 1825 }any_pop = {scaled_militancy = {ideology = liberal factor = 10" Middle_class_unrest = gentry, more influential = more liberal militancy; raw.githubusercontent .com/AoE-guys/AoE-SP-VERSION-DISCONTINUED-/master/AOE/common/event_modifiers.txt : "burghers_pm = { factory_output = 0.05 education_efficiency_modifier = 0.10", "gentry_pm = { 	RGO_throughput = 0.05 	factory_throughput = 0.05 	education_efficiency_modifier = 0.05 icon = 4", "religion_wins = { 	icon = 1 	culture_tech_research_bonus = 0.1 } religion_lose = { 	icon = 1 	culture_tech_research_bonus = -0.05 	research_points = 0.1", "rich_unrest_5 = {     tax_efficiency = -0.05 	RGO_throughput = -0.50 	education_efficiency_modifier = -0.25 	global_pop_militancy_modifier = 0.005 	icon = 18 }" As rich-unrest-stages increase, it becomes less educated., "middle_class_unrest_5 = {     tax_efficiency = -0.05 	RGO_throughput = -0.25 	factory_throughput = -0.25     factory_input = 0.50	 	icon = 18 }"; github .com/MaTi5893/AoE-remake/tree/main/AoE%20Multiplayer%20Remake/poptypes : Gentry_pm supports socialism (Reformism) & limited citizenship., pm_nobleman supports conservatism & residency.; github .com/AoE-guys/AoE-SP-VERSION-DISCONTINUED-/blob/master/AOE/common/ideologies.txt : Conservatism accepts reform by militancy & movement-strength, military_reform & removes economic_reform., socialist_group = { 	socialist = { #Reformist 		uncivilized = no 		date = 1745.1.1 		 		add_political_reform = { 			base = 1 		} 		remove_political_reform = { 			base = 0 		} 		add_social_reform = { 			base = 1 		} 		remove_social_reform = { 			base = 0 		} 	} 	 	communist = { #Jacobin 		uncivilized = no 				date = 1770.1.1 , [liberal = { #Moderates burgher 		#date = 1705.1.1 		 		add_political_reform = { 			base = 1 		} 		remove_political_reform = { 			base = 0 		} 		add_social_reform = { #Rework this later btw 			base = 0.5", "remove_social_reform = { 			base = 0 		} 		 		add_military_reform = { 			base = 0.5 		} 		 		add_economic_reform = { 			base = 1 		}], [anarcho_liberal = { #not used	date = 1970.1.1 		uncivilized = no];
2025.03.17: DebateArena-AI: 1750 Paris focused on arts, philosophy too & revolutionary ideas such as liberty, equality & fraternity, fueling the French Revolution & challenging established authority. London focused on trade & empirical science.; 2025.03.31: DebateArena-AI: (About 1750 London: [Dukes and other controlled it. Gentry-Barons more and fewer but growing merchant (trade-managers) influenced it.], Enlightenment declined because of those causes: industrial revolution making people focus on economic growth instead of intellect pursuit. Unrest and revolution due social inequality, political oppression & economic hardships distracted them from enlightened ideals away. Shift to romanticism (nature & emotion) due artists & thinkers claiming that emotion reveals deeper truth about humanity (existential questions and societal issues to improve life) & shift from aristocracy to mercantilism to laissez-faire capitalism. Industrial revolution driven by technological advancement, urbanization & shift to capitalist economies. 2025.03.25/analyseeconomique.wordpress .com/2012/07/19/jewish-genius-by-charles-murray/ : "Jews are only about average on the subtests measuring visuo-spatial skills, but extremely high on subtests that measure verbal and reasoning skills." (*Chinese have higher spartial IQ & supported meritocracy first.) With USA IQ as norm. "IQ score of 140 or higher, denoting the level of intelligence that can permit people to excel in fields like theoretical physics and pure mathematics. If the mean Jewish IQ is 110 and the standard deviation is 15, then the proportion of Jews with IQ’s of 140 or higher is somewhere around six times the proportion of everyone else.", "Exceptional intelligence is not enough to explain exceptional accomplishment. Qualities such as imagination, ambition, perseverance, and curiosity are decisive in separating the merely smart from the highly productive.", "must be very smart to have even a chance of achieving great work.", "disproportionately high Jewish accomplishment in the arts and sciences since the 18th century", "Gregory Cochran (a physicist) and Jason Hardy and Henry Harpending (anthropologists) contend that elevated Jewish IQ is confined to the Ashkenazi Jews of northern and central Europe, and developed from the Middle Ages onward, primarily from 800 to 1600 C.E.", "resources that manifested themselves outside of Ashkenaz and well before the period when non-rabbinic Ashkenazi accomplishment manifested itself.", "cognitive tests, today’s Chinese do especially well on visuo-spatial skills.", Replies: "Murray’s biology is as failed as his putative generosity.", "significant proportion of Jewish Nobel laureates have also been U.S. citizens, and that U.S. citizens of all racial, religious, and ethnic stripes enjoy more access to top research facilities and academic resources than the citizens of other countries. The second most-represented category of Nobel laureates, not surprisingly, is European academics, who have been similarly connected to well-endowed centers of learning.", "literacy does not require high IQ.", "startling absence of any stereotype in classical writings that Jews were “smart.” In Menahem Stern’s comprehensive anthology of classical references to Jews by Greek and Latin authors, not a single one attributes unusual intelligence to them. Finally, the particular alleles (genetic forms) related to intelligence that we think were favored by selection are young, most of them around a thousand years old. By Mr. Murray’s reckoning, they should be much older.", "no historical documentation of this among Ashkenazi Jews. If it was a common occurrence, we should expect to find traces of Middle Eastern DNA among the Gentile populations in Poland, Lithuania, and Russia. So far, none has been reported, so we are skeptical of the hypothesis.", (Marc Mayerson University of California Los Angeles, California : "any sample, random inequalities will dictate that one subset will emerge at the high end of a normal distribution. There need not be any special reason for this other than statistical probability and the inevitable results of measurement itself."), "research will find that the genes favoring resistance to typhoid are linked to a predisposition toward Tay-Sachs (a signature of Ashkenazi Jews), as well as to enhanced reasoning abilities. If so, “Jewish genius” may be only an accidental byproduct of an evolutionary adaptation to an environment of urban squalor.", "To cite heredity as a means of explaining why one trait (high intelligence) is more prevalent in one group (Ashkenazi Jews) than in another (the surrounding Gentiles), one does not have to demonstrate that the trait is promoted in the one group; it is enough to show that the other group selects less for it."..."If homosexuality is linked in any way to intelligence—as it has been linked to artistic achievement—then here is another factor that might have disfavored the gene pool of Christians.";
2026.04.11/britannica .com/science/genius-psychology : Gifted children, IQ test not working beyond a maximum threshold., "The word genius is used in two closely related but somewhat different senses. In the first sense, as popularized by Terman, it refers to great intellectual ability as measured by performance on a standardized intelligence test. In the second and more popular sense, as derived from work of the 19th-century English scientist Sir Francis Galton, it designates creative ability of an exceptionally high order as demonstrated by actual achievement—always provided that such achievement is not merely of transitory value or the result of accident of birth.  Genius is distinguished from talent, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Talent refers to a native aptitude for some special kind of work and implies a relatively quick and easy acquisition of a particular skill within a domain (sphere of activity or knowledge). Genius, on the other hand, involves originality, creativity, and the ability to think and work in areas not previously explored—thus giving the world something of value that would not otherwise exist.",
"Galton, who inaugurated the systematic study of genius, formulated the theory that genius is a very extreme degree of three combined traits—intellect, zeal, and power of working",
"controversial viewpoint, and, since its introduction, scientists have disagreed about the degree to which biological heredity, as distinct from education and opportunity, is responsible for the great differences in achievement between individuals.",
"New ways of describing genius nearly always incorporate ability, creativity, mastery of a domain, and other personality traits such as autonomy and capacity for endurance. One important contemporary perspective, developed by the American psychologist Howard Gardner, is the theory of multiple intelligences. Gardner identified at least eight particular types of intelligence. Like all human traits, these so-called “multiple intelligences” are thought to be distributed relatively evenly throughout a population. It is likely that the genius, however, is born with extraordinary capacities in at least one of these areas. Gardner’s eight key intelligences can be used to illustrate genius in particular fields. For example, great writers possess linguistic intelligence; brilliant scientists have mathematical-logical intelligence; eminent artists display spatial-visual intelligence; great musicians are born with musical intelligence; accomplished dancers have kinesthetic intelligence; great leaders excel in interpersonal intelligence; successful therapists have intrapersonal intelligence; and well-known explorers have naturalistic intelligence. To these categories the American psychologist Robert A. Emmons added spiritual intelligence, as observed in prominent religious leaders. Neuropsychologists have sought the physiological foundation for these intelligences in the human brain, and there has been a race to develop appropriate means of assessing each of these capacities.  The Hungarian-born American psychologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi depicted ways in which creativity and mastery of a domain relate to the development of genius. His study of eminent men and women showed how great creative achievement cannot exist without mastery of the skills and specific knowledge of a domain. These can be achieved only through excellent training and access to accomplished teachers and mentors. At the same time, Csikszentmihalyi demonstrated a link between creative genius and “flow,” a state of mind in which the creative individual experiences a sense of challenge, timelessness, and oneness with the work at hand." (Balance between the challenging, common sense realist, early-18th-century and the simplifying, objective-artificial late-18th-century London/Paris/genius cities.) "Finally, in studying the personalities of prominent individuals, Csikszentmihalyi identified common attributes in their psychological makeup. One such trait is autonomy, which is needed for working alone and for daring to express novel or divergent points of view. Another example is endurance, which involves an ability to persist, to complete tasks, and to follow through—a characteristic that all true geniuses seem to have.  The qualities of extreme genius may, however, be associated with unique problems. While Terman found that children of high general intelligence, classified as “gifted” or “potential genius,” are on the average superior to other children in physique and health and in emotional and social adjustment, Hollingworth’s studies (as well as more-recent investigations) showed that profoundly gifted children may suffer a variety of problems related to their clear deviance from their age peers. Recent observers of the highly gifted point to a variety of intrapsychic and interpersonal stressors that accompany the “asynchronous” development of geniuses.  It is a conundrum then that while certain personality traits promote extraordinary achievement, some mental disorders are apparently associated with extreme genius. The American mathematician and Nobel Prize winner John F. Nash, for example, published his influential work on game theory in 1950 at age 22. He became a tenured professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1958, but bouts of mental illness caused him to resign his faculty position in 1959. Bipolar disorder, the most commonly diagnosed disorder of creative geniuses, is characterized by extreme swings of mood, from exhilaration to depression, and has been particularly associated with artists, writers, musicians, and entrepreneurs. The American psychiatrist Kay Jamison suggested that, although most people who have this disorder are debilitated by it, there may be ways in which the extreme energy and expansiveness of a moderate manic state may contribute to the extraordinary feats of productivity that characterize many geniuses. Even moderate amounts of depression, with its attendant criticality (i.e., danger or risk), may improve the capacity of geniuses to impose a strict evaluation of their work following a bout of creative production. Nevertheless, it does seem that, for the most part, geniuses with this disorder have struggled with it more than they have benefited from it.",
"Many scholars believe that genius is a function of both heredity and environment. The original potential for exceptional achievement may be inherited, but the fruition of this potential depends also, at least to some extent, on opportunity, training, mastery of a domain, capacity to experience flow, autonomy, endurance, and a combination of hereditary and socially influenced personality traits.",
"innovation, the creation of a new way of doing something, whether the enterprise is concrete (e.g., the development of a new product) or abstract (e.g., the development of a new philosophy or theoretical approach to a problem). Innovation plays a key role in the development of sustainable methods of both production and living because in both cases it may be necessary to create alternatives to conventional ways of doing things that were developed before environmental consideration was central to most people’s framework for making decisions.  Because innovation plays a central role in business success as well as in scientific progress, considerable research has focused on specifying the working conditions that are likely to produce useful innovations. In general, scholars have noted that the best model for producing useful knowledge about the empirical world (i.e., knowledge based on observation and experimentation rather than theory or belief) is to foster the work of many relatively autonomous specialists whose work is judged by its merits rather than its conformity to pre-existing beliefs or traditional ways of doing things. This reflects the attitude that enables the creation of modern scientific practice, an attitude that may be traced back to 17th-century Europe.  Several attitudes and practices from that period also apply to fostering modern scientific and technical innovation. Scientific or innovative contributions should be evaluated on the basis of impersonal criteria (that is, according to the contribution’s accuracy in describing the world and the degree to which it works more efficiently than the old method) rather than according to who produced them or the personal characteristics (such as race, gender, nationality) of the person who produced them. Knowledge should be shared rather than kept secret so others can apply it to their work and the general level of knowledge can increase. Furthermore, scientists should act in a disinterested manner, seeking to increase knowledge rather than focusing purely on personal gain, and scientific claims cannot be made on the basis of authority but are open to challenge and should hold up under scrutiny. Of course, some of these rules are somewhat modified in the modern world—for instance, people do profit from their own discoveries, both directly in terms of holding patents and indirectly in terms of career success—but the basic principles hold true. Scientific innovation  In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), American philosopher and historian Thomas Kuhn made a distinction between what he called normal science and episodes of scientific revolution. He defined normal science as the process of solving puzzles within the paradigms currently established for one’s particular science. For instance, in astronomy, it was believed for centuries that the planets orbited around the Earth (the geocentric model) and complex models and calculations were developed to try to explain the observed movements of the planets within this model. In contrast, scientific revolutions involve challenging or changing the dominant paradigms, as Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus did when he proposed a heliocentric universe in which the Earth as well as the other planets orbited around the sun. Most science in any time period is normal science, with people working within an existing framework that includes methods, assumptions about nature, symbolic generations, and paradigmatic experiments. Even observations that do not seem to fit the existing paradigm will be explained within it (as planetary motion was for centuries in the geocentric model) or ignored as anomalies. At some point, however, the contradictions and anomalies may become too obvious and trigger a scientific revolution, as happened in the 16th century in Europe (notably not recognized by a powerful social institution, the Catholic Church, until centuries later).  Most scientists and technical employees today are analogous to normal scientists, working to discover practical applications or to illuminate small areas of knowledge within a given scientific model. For instance, many scientists in the United States are employees of corporations, government agencies, and so on, and are expected to work within accepted models rather than challenge them. This leads to conflict between the scientist’s desire for autonomy and the organization’s desire for practical results, and can stifle innovation that could lead ultimately to greater breakthroughs. One way this problem is dealt with is to have people specialize in either basic or applied science, with different evaluative criteria for each, and to have part of an organization’s budget reserved for basic research that may challenge the existing paradigm rather than work within it.",
"Another conflict for scientists and technical employees, particularly those working in for-profit companies, is their desire to communicate their discoveries to others versus their employers’ desire to keep such discoveries confidential in order to protect their profitability. Patent law is intended to allow both desires to be met. The purpose of the patent system is to stimulate scientific and technical invention by reserving the right to profit from a discovery for a period of years to the patent holder (which may be an individual or organization such as a company or university) while also making the information from the discovery public so that others may learn from it. The patent holder may sell or license the right for others to use his or her discoveries and collect fees from them." (They/them and generic masculine includes everyone in a shorter way.),
"Changes in organization may be less dramatic than scientific discoveries but are equally important in terms of promoting efficiency and productivity. For instance, an organization may innovate in the way it operates or delivers services, resulting in greater efficiency, fewer errors, faster speed of production, and so on. In The Challenge of Innovating in Government (2006), Canadian political scientist Sandford Borins identifies several characteristics typical of organizations that are successful at innovation:  Top management supports innovation and provides leadership in this area. Individuals who push for innovation are rewarded. The organization dedicates resources specifically to innovation rather than expecting it to happen as a matter of course. The organization has a diverse workforce and welcomes ideas from outside the mainstream. The organization’s bureaucratic layers are closely connected so that innovations can be easily communicated and implemented. The organization is willing to experiment with different ways of doing things with the understanding that not all will be successful. Borins notes that some of these characteristics are the opposite of what is seen in many government organizations and companies. For instance, in many organizations, people who suggest or enact innovation may be subject to sanction or dismissal, and the organization may display no interest in testing different ideas to see which are useful and practical. Some organizations have a superficial commitment to innovation in the sense that they eagerly embrace whatever the current trendy solution is but do not display the commitment to evaluate the usefulness of the new ideas or conduct any kind of measurement to see if they produce the desired results. Both approaches stifle effective innovation (as they would stifle effective scientific progress) because they are based on received beliefs and authority rather than on empirical observation and testing." (This confirms Charles Murray's claim that scientific progress and innovation both in its groundbreakingness and number is decreasing. Also confirms that the Enlightenment is over.) "Examples of industrial and technological innovation  Moravian-born American economist and sociologist Joseph Schumpeter used the term creative destruction to describe change of the economy from within. He viewed entrepreneurs, who invent new goods and new ways of doing things, as essential to keeping an economic system constantly evolving. New products or ways of doing things necessarily disrupt existing markets. For example, the department and catalog store Montgomery Ward was once a major retailer but went out of business in 2001, due in part to loss of market share to low-price department stores such as Kmart and Walmart. Similarly, the instant-film camera developed by Polaroid was a popular consumer product for several decades but ceased production when it was surpassed by digital cameras. Schumpeter saw the process of creative destruction as positive in the long run because it promoted economic growth and rewarded innovation and improvement. Such experiences were informative to businesses to illustrate that individuals and corporations could also suffer when their particular skills or products were no longer demanded by the market.  American economist and professor Clayton M. Christensen coined the term disruptive technology (later disruptive innovation) to describe innovations that improve a product or service in ways that disrupt an existing market (as opposed to a “sustaining innovation,” which improves an existing product and reinforces the position of leading manufacturers in the field" (Like Late Baroque and Enlightened Absolutism music in 1750s. 2026.04.13/courses.lumenlearning .com/suny-fmcc-hum140/chapter/3-10-music-of-the-enlightenment-the-classical-era/ : "At first the new style took over baroque forms—the ternary da capo aria and the sinfonia and concerto—but composed with simpler parts, more notated ornamentation and more emphatic division into sections.") ). The disruptive innovation often has characteristics that the traditional customer base does not care about, and may even be inferior compared to existing products, but will appeal to a different set of customers with different priorities." (Like enlightened aristocrats against monarchy and ancien regime economy on mid-18th-century.) "The innovation is “disruptive” not to the consumer (who, at least at first, has the choice to buy either the existing or innovative product) but to businesses that may be doing a good job supplying an existing product and yet see their market disappear as the new technology becomes widespread." (Social influencers.) "One example of a disruptive innovation is downloadable music files that offer the convenience of buying music online and playing it from one’s computer, as well as the ability to purchase individual songs. This appealed first to young people" (Biggest socially influencing and technologically advanced elite.) "who were quite comfortable with computers and MP3 players (versus older consumers more used to fixed stereo systems and the concept of songs collected into albums) and severely cut into the market for compact discs.  Cooperation between manufacturers and other institutions such as universities can facilitate innovation. In his work Biotechnology: The University-Industrial Complex (1986), American sociologist Martin Kenney coined the term university-industrial complex to describe, in the biotechnology industry, the flow of resources among universities (which provide knowledge and skilled labor), multinational corporations (that produce products), and venture capital firms (that provide financing to both research and production)." (Unity between right-wing-corporations, capitalists and left-wing-universities promotes innovation.) "He noted that university-employed scientists have provided most of the research that formed the basis of the biotech industry, that scientists often move between employment in academia and the corporate sector, and that many university graduate programs have been created or enlarged specifically to train students for the biotech industry." (Maybe contradicts that recommendation letters in late-first-grade-physics starts the politicization according to SimplePhysics or so Podcast on YouTube, which acts negative on Classical Physics and Objective Realism on macro-physical world as a whole to a different interpretation of Michael Pendlebury about Objectivism being platonic and common Sense Realism being Aristotelian and together forming a more genuine form of Objective Realism as the survey of before-first-grade-students on Physics shows on their conception being Naïve Impetus Theory the most, Newtonian second and Aristotelian third.) "Development of the biotech industry was facilitated in large part by increased federal funding for science," (Most non-British European countries facilitate on science funding at mid-18th-century.) "with grants awarded on a competitive basis, (Maybe mid-18th-century-Britain.) "which rewarded innovation while also facilitating the creation of well-equipped research labs at universities as well as within corporations. Other sciences have also followed the biotechnology model, with close relationships between the university and corporations becoming the norm, such that many universities now have “technology transfer” offices to facilitate the process.  Regional methods of organization can also influence innovation. In the early 1990s American regional planner and political scientist AnnaLee Saxenian looked at the differing fortunes of two areas once noted for their high-technology industry: Silicon Valley (south of San Francisco, California) and the Route 128 area (near Boston, Massachusetts). In the 1970s, both were noted as centers of innovation in the electronics industry, fueled in part by university research and military spending, and both faced downturns in the early 1980s. Silicon Valley recovered, however, with the help of new start-ups such as Sun Microsystems, as well as the continued prosperity of established companies such as Intel and Hewlett-Packard (HP), while Route 128 companies such as Wang Laboratories and Digital Equipment Corporation went out of business, and other area companies declined. Business investment in Silicon Valley increased by $25 billion between 1986 and 1990 while only increasing by $1 billion in the Route 128 area, and by 1990, Texas and southern California had both surpassed Route 128 as centers of electronics production.  Saxenian attributes these differences to differing regional industrial organization. Silicon Valley had a network-based industrial system with dense social networks and open labor markets, which promoted experimentation and collective learning so that competitors can learn from each other. The boundaries between individual companies and other institutions such as universities remained fluid. In contrast, Route 128 was characterized by a small number of large, hierarchical firms with barriers to information sharing between different firms and between firms and other institutions. Silicon Valley’s network system was better able to adapt to change (e.g., recovering from the loss of silicon chip manufacturing to Japan) while the Route 128 manufacturers were not able to respond when the industry shifted from minicomputers to workstations and personal computers. In general, Saxenian argued that industrial organization based on independent firms (the Route 128 model) can flourish when markets are stable and technology changes slowly because they can capitalize on economies of scale" (pre-mid-18th-century-Europe like early-18th-century-Europe copying Chinese tech according to Britannica and pre-enlightened empires.)", but in a rapidly changing industry" (Enlightenment) ", firms " (non-enlightened empires) "may find themselves saddled with obsolete technology (Increased technological gap at late-18th-century-Europe according to Britannica.) "and a workforce with outdated skills " (Industrial Revolution in 18th century Europe was first time for workers with no skills to get a job according to 2026.04.13/selfed .org.uk/node/2844 and be productive, which impacts negatively on genius-rate I assume. Otherwise, the non-enlightened-workers skills gets outdated like farmers.) "and are less able to access external sources of information. In contrast, the regional network type of organization is more flexible in responding to change and better able to promote collective technological advance."
Genius-note:a

Inventor-note:v
2026.02.22/forum.paradoxplaza .com/forum/threads/linking-literacy-rate-with-the-speed-of-scientific-research-isnt-it-too-far-fetched.1743215/ : "early days of the British Industrial Revolution, inventions and creations had little to do with knowledge, but were created in the practice of workers. Watt, Samuel Crompton, and Hargreaves had never been to university, and Hargreaves was even completely illiterate.";
2026.02.22/forum.paradoxplaza .com/forum/threads/this-feels-very-backwards.1895344/ : "Christian clergy were not the most studied in the entirety of the period that EU5 covers, as certain nations started to secularize and separate universities from the church, especially after the Reformation." 2 likes, "clergy should not be the main source of research past the mid XVIIth century though, but before (1337 - 1650), it was historically the institution where most advancement were made. 
But nobles and burghers should also be able to build a little bit of research at game start. So that later, the game would just have to reverse the balance of research production from the clergy to the burghers, while the noble would be a sort of neutral and consistant weak source of research. 
OR the fun option : make it like stellaris or EUIV and create 3 types of research, one for military (nobles), one for administration (clergy) and one for diplomacy (burghers). Unlikely but inspiring 
After the Scientific Revolution of the XVIIth century," 4 likes, "rise of the burghers, at the expense of nobility and clergy, with their societal functions gradually being taken over by the burghers and sometimes even the commoners", 
"clergy, especially in Europe, became less and less relevant to the advancement of science from the 1500s onward. The great philosophers and scientists of the time (Bacon, Newton, Descartes, Leibniz, to name a few) might have been deeply religious, but more often than not there weren't men of the cloth."..."It's false to carry the idea of "religion institution is responsible for science" from start to finish of the game. This is not the middle ages where all science was transmitted in monasteries.", "nothing to do with the clergy science abstraction in the game: you have the same kind of men as you've mentioned in the arabic world or china yet their inventions did almost nothing to advance the average level of technology in these regions
it's because what matters is the spread of the inventions on top of capital and free time to implement them and not inventions themselves. You can basically compare latin church to the internet of the era and the monasteries+universities were instrumental in the propagation and also creating demand for anything other than consumption goods" 1 like, "there was a significant overlap between literate society and clergy. So for much of the period, clergymen are disproportionately represented in the class of people reading, writing, and thinking. But religious institutions were frequently--or, we can at least agree, were frequently regarded as--forces of reaction. There's a reason Diderot said that man would never be free until the last king was strangled in the entrails of the last priest: Enlightenment thinkers understood the monarchy and the Church as the twin pillars of anti-enlightenment. We now may agree or disagree, but it's certainly what people perceived at the time. This is especially true when you remember that we're not talking about "technology"--we're talking about advances, in the sense of social changes and developments. Strictly "technological" advances in the game are often more about social adoption or dissemination; they're rarely about the sheer knowledge of an engineering technique. Thus I don't really understand why, if your bishops feel their privileges are being protected, they are going to make social advances and changes happen more quickly. More importantly, I can't identify any historical examples of this dynamic, where indulgent treatment of religious institutions drove forward cultural and technological development. The level of reaction certainly varies over time, but I don't think you can claim that the contentedness of the church can be consistently linked to the things represented by in-game advances.
One thought is that it would be more accurate to emphasize the role of religion in social control. That might need to be keyed to specific religions: Catholic clergy satisfaction might boost your commoner satisfaction, whereas Lutheran and Calvinist clergy satisfaction might boost your burgher satisfaction.";
2026.03.26/nobelprize .org/uploads/2024/12/johnson-lecture.pdf : p.31: "1940-45: Scientific and technological leadership passed from Europe to the United States, never (yet) to return";
2026.03.28/organism .earth/library/document/connections-07 : "Often, materials discovered by accident alter the course of the world. In the 1600s Dutch commercial freighters controlled Atlantic trade routes. Competing British lines induced America to produce pitch to protect hulls of their royal vessels. This arrangement lasted until 1776, after which a Scottish inventor tried to produce pitch from coal tar. By the time he succeeded the navy was using copper instead. Subsequent experiments with coal tar yielded gaslight lamps, waterproofed garments, a brilliant mauve dye that established the German chemical industry and nylon, the first of the miracle plastics.";
2026.04.01/intriguing-history .com/john-kay-inventor-of-flying-shuttle/ : "John Kay, inventor of the ‘Flying Shuttle’, held in his hands, the first flutterings of what would become, the Industrial Revolution.  John Kay was a man whose entire young life had been exposed to the woolen industry. He knew the problems and the pitfalls of mechanization but could see the great need for advancement in the industry.", "In 1733 he patented the ‘New engine for opening and dressing wool’, this machine included the famous ‘flying shuttle’.", "The flying shuttle was a simple device that had huge impact The shuttle was only one part of a textile loom but it was the part that had to be physically thrown backwards and forwards by the weaver as it carries the weft through the warp. John Kay’s shuttle was shot out of a box, backwards and forwards, carrying the weft without the weaver having to come into contact with the shuttle at all.  It had an enormous impact on the woolen industry. The owners loved it because it sped up the process and they could reduce the number of people they employed. The workers were impoverished by it. John Kay was the subject of many personal attacks upon himself as he struggled for financial and literal survival.", "For John Kay himself it brought misery. Manufacturers refused to pay him royalties on his invention and so he took his looms to France, here alas, they were not overly impressed by John Kay’s invention and he had to negotiate hard with the French government to get them to buy his technology.
John Kay hardly ever returned to England after 1756 becoming domiciled with his family in France.", "Inventions beget inventions and so it was with the flying shuttle, the ‘spinning jenny’ was born out of the necessity to produce more thread and so the Industrial Revolution kept revolving. John Kay died in 1779, still fighting for the money he was owed by manufacturers and governments alike."
Inventor-note:a

Counter Inventor-note:v
2026.04.01/intriguing-history .com/john-kay-house-destroyed-by-machine-breakerskeeps-inventing/ : "John Kay 1753-54 House destroyed by machine breakers…keeps inventing", "John Kay Inventor of the Flying Shuttle", "In 1754 John invented an improved carding machine which allowed the mill manufacturers to mechanise further but still they managed not to pay him for his patents."
Counter Inventor-note:a

Saharan genius:v
2025.03.17: DebateArena-AI said the Timbuktu-scholars in 14th-17th century flourished.
Saharan genius:a

Purpose and autonomous efficacy-note:v
2026.02.08 : DeepSeek-Ai online and 2 others with the question and similar like "Which culture in history had the strongest sense that one is free to act as an individual, the strongest sense that individual action can be efficacious, strongest sense that life in general has a purpose, as opposed to being pointless, and the strongest sense that this life is uniquely important, and is not just one of an ongoing sequence of lives at same time?" after several times said classical Greece "Classical Athens (5th century BCE)", which is agreed by most AIs. DeepSeek brought Spartan culture 2026.02.08/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Spartan_hegemony : 404-371 BC , 2026.02.08/en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Classical_Greece : 500-400 BC, duck .ai with GPT-OSS 122B and gpt-5o mini agrees on classical greece being most committed to objective realism mostly., 2026.02.08/historyspage .com/post/sparta-and-athens-their-confusing-relationship-explained : "The 2nd (or Great) Peloponnesian War was fought between 431 and 404 BC.  After much fighting Athens was forced to surrender to Sparta."
   "As strained as their relationships may have been, Sparta and Athens were often compelled to work together for the common good of Greece." I conclude with short AI-research that the most committed to objective realist and most purpose and autonomous efficacy is the border and Athens themselves in 404-400 BC if strong Spartanian influence was present in Athens, yet GPT-4 mini disagrees., 2026.02.08/duck .ai: Mistral Small 3: American culture after asking:"Which culture embodies this the most?"
Purpose and autonomous efficacy-note:a

Enlightenment-related-note:v
2025.04.27/old.reddit .com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/comments/gx83ro/the_political_compass_high_school_edition/ : The questionnaire-schooler is at center of lib-left-quadrant.
Enlightenment-related-note:a

Late 19th century-note:v
2026.02.03/infrequently .org/2025/10/the-app-store-was-always-authoritarian/ : 2026.02.03/home.uchicago .edu/csunstei/moreisless.html : "We can see clearly now that this micro-authoritarian structure is easily swayed by macro-authoritarians, and bends easily to those demands. As James C. Scott wrote:
I believe that many of the most tragic episodes of state development in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries originate in a particularly pernicious combination of three elements. The first is the aspiration to the administrative ordering of nature and society, an aspiration that we have already seen at work in scientific forestry, but one raised to a far more comprehensive and ambitious level. “High modernism” seems an appropriate term for this aspiration. As a faith, it was shared by many across a wide spectrum of political ideologies. Its main carriers and exponents were the avant-garde among engineers, planners, technocrats, high-level administrators, architects, scientists, and visionaries.
If one were to imagine a pantheon or Hall of Fame of high-modernist figures, it would almost certainly include such names as Henri Comte de Saint-Simon, Le Corbusier, Walther Rathenau, Robert McNamara, Robert Moses, Jean Monnet, the Shah of Iran, David Lilienthal, Vladimir I. Lenin, Leon Trotsky, and Julius Nyerere. They envisioned a sweeping, rational engineering of all aspects of social life in order to improve the human condition.
— James C. Scott,
"Seeing Like A State""
Late 19th century-note:a


Nation-note:v
2025.03.11: 2018-02-06: Ch. 8 Nation State Definition Examples & Characteristics Video: 
0:40 Nation-State determines what common language we speak, what laws we follow & what holidays we celebrate.
1:15 Broadest terms, the state is a body of government, the rules and laws, the government officials & their titles, the physical boundaries & those who define them.
1:22 The state is what makes a country run from a political, practical standpoint. 
1:33 Nation is the people, created by a shared belief that the people inside a country are connected to each other.
1:45 The idea that people of a nation are connected to each other is called Nationalism.
2:06 The United States is a result of similar people living in the same area in the United States. The colonists began developing an unique national culture, which led to them declaring war against England & creating their own government & state.
2:25 When Mexico became independent from Spain, the country was too large & fragmented for the people to have developed a national culture. Dozens of different identities. It took nearly a century for the Mexican government to develop a sense of Mexicanness or Mexicanidad in Spanish. They had to control language, education & holidays to be on same national culture.
3:15 15th-century-Italy, the independent body of government was centered on a city. City-states: based on city, but their power extended beyond the city limits & could change. 
3:34 Nation-state by contrast has definite border where its power ends.
3:44 At one time, kingdoms & empirics rules over lots of very different people who did not see themselves as united or sharing any sort of identity. 
3:50 Scholars debate about nation-states's origin "Imagined communities"-author Historian Benedict Anderson argued that nation-states began because of print media such as newspapers when the rise in literacy and new technologies like the printing press between 1500-1600 let people talk to each other in new ways. They discussed their similarities & ideas through the press & this meant they had to share a common language. They began to form the early version of national identities. Anderson's argument is still the most commonly held belief by historians. 
4:38 However, other scholars noted  origin by map technologies in 1500s, when European merchants began sailing around the world for first time. Better maps & tech to move people & goods change the way that people particularly rulers understood boundaries & borders.
5:10 Where there was no long-standing government in place, particularly in European colonies in the Americas, people got rid of old governments & formed new ones. Some of the first true nation-states were former colonies. In Italy & Germany, Identity came first. In other areas like England/UK or China, the political state was established first & then had to develop a national culture. Just like in Mexico.
5:43 By the late 1800s, the nation-state was the dominant form of political and cultural organization in the world. 8:19 : Literacy & press media, new shipping technologies & new maps all changed the way people reorganize along new ideals. 8:23 Nation-state appeared during Age of Exploration some time between 1500-1700s & it became the dominant system by late 1800s. Sometimes nation developed first, sometimes the state. Comment: Portugal with majority court power at most territory, no hierarchy etc. is first Nation-State & one of most homogenous nation.;
2025.03.11/britannica .com/topic/nation-state : "nation-state, a territorially bounded sovereign polity—i.e., a state—that is ruled in the name of a community of citizens who identify themselves as a nation. The legitimacy of a nation-state’s rule over a territory and over the population inhabiting it stems from the right of a core national group within the state (which may include all or only some of its citizens) to self-determination. Members of the core national group see the state as belonging to them and consider the approximate territory of the state to be their homeland. Accordingly, they demand that other groups, both within and outside the state, recognize and respect their control over the state. As the American sociologist Rogers Brubaker put it in Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe (1996), nation-states are “states of and for particular nations.”  As a political model, the nation-state fuses two principles: the principle of state sovereignty, first articulated in the Peace of Westphalia (1648), which recognizes the right of states to govern their territories without external interference; and the principle of national sovereignty, which recognizes the right of national communities to govern themselves. National sovereignty in turn is based on the moral-philosophical principle of popular sovereignty, according to which states belong to their peoples. The latter principle implies that legitimate rule of a state requires some sort of consent by the people.", "France after the French Revolution (1787–99) is often cited as the first nation-state, some scholars consider the establishment of the English Commonwealth in 1649 as the earliest instance of nation-state creation. Since the late 18th century the nation-state has gradually become the dominant vehicle of rule over geographic territories, replacing polities that were governed through other principles of legitimacy. The latter included dynastic monarchies (e.g., the Habsburg and Ethiopian empires), theocratic states (e.g., the Dalai Lama’s rule over Tibet and the rule of the prince-bishops of Montenegro), colonial empires (justified by colonizing powers as a means of spreading a “true” religion or of bringing progress to “backward” peoples), and communist revolutionary governments that purported to act in the name of a transnational working class", "some nation-states have been formed by polity-seeking national movements, others have formed when existing polities were nationalized—i.e., transformed into nation-states—either because theocrats or monarchs ceded authority to parliaments (as in Britain and France) or because empires retreated or broke apart (as did the British and French colonial empires in the mid-20th century and the Soviet empire in eastern Europe beginning in the late 1980s).", "processes of nation-state formation increase the likelihood of wars. As the social scientists Andreas Wimmer and Brian Min showed in a 2006 study (“From Empire to Nation-State: Explaining Wars in the Modern World, 1816–2001”), three types of wars are more prevalent at approximately the time of the foundation of nation-states"
Nation-note:a

Social contract-note:v
2025.03.03/blog.ipleaders .in/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-social-contract-theory/ : Social contract is "predominantly associated with the English philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke and the French Philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau.", "	1	Legislature: It had the power to make laws. The legislature was the supreme body within the government. 
Executive: The power to enforce the law was vested in the executive. Executive also included the judicial power. The executive was subordinate and accountable to the legislature.
Federative: The Federative wing had the power to make treaties and conduct external relations."; 2025.03.03/rintintin.colorado .edu/~vancecd/phil215/Huemer1.pdf : "David Hume,
We may as well assert that a man, by remaining in a vessel, freely consents to the dominion of the master; though he was carried on board while asleep, and must leap into the ocean, and perish, the moment he leaves her.11", "not the primary issue. The primary issue is whether one is being asked to give up something to which one has a right, as the price of rejecting the social contract."
Social contract-note:a

Superstition reduced crime:v
2025.03.17/ 2013: dirt.asla .org/2013/05/ ;
Superstition reduced crime:a