Welcome to

The critical condition of today's society i2001.1.6j

Today's society is in a critical situation. The crisis exists not only in external ways such as the crisis of the economy and the social system, but also in the fundamental aspects of the very existence of human beings. Unless humankind is able to somehow overcome this crisis, its human existence is bound to be lost.
How did humankind fall into such a critical state -a state that endangers its very existence? Unless the fundamental causes for this crisis are clarified, humankind will be unable to escape the peril that faces it. In this work, I will seek to clarify the fundamental causes for this crisis and present the answers that I have developed for responding to this problem and overcoming it.
Modern society is established on the foundation of individualism. And at the root of that individualism is the concept of self. Thus, the shakeup of the present-day society is also a shakeup of individualism. The individual, the core of individualism, is an objectification of the self. Therefore, the shakeup of individualism stems from the unstable foundation of the concept of self.
Individualism encompasses both individualism which is conscious of the self and individualism which is not conscious of the self. The individualism which is conscious of the self tends to grasp the world in an internal (internally reflective) manner, while the individualism which is unconscious of the self tends to grasp the world in an external (externally projected) manner. For this reason, we will define the concepts of the self-conscious and non-self-conscious selves as internally reflective and externally projected selves, respectively. The concept of the internally reflective self has developed the spiritual world, while the concept of the externally projected self has created social and economic systems, as well as science.
The type of individualism which is conscious (of the self) developed more in the East, while that not conscious (of the self) developed more in the West. One of the reasons for these separate courses of development in East and West has to do with language. In the East, there are many words that describe the self, and these words can be used variously to express a precise meaning or nuance of the concept of self. In contrast, few words in the West can express the self appropriately. In fact, some would go so far as to claim that there are no words for self at all. Strictly speaking, "jiko" (self) is not "oneself," nor is it "ego." In the East, where the word "self" is used often, there is a tendency to attribute the cause of all things to the self, which, in turn, has made the relationship between the self and others ambiguous. In contrast to this, in the West, because there is no appropriate word for "self," people have to express the "self" in an indirect manner, and that has resulted in the development of the external concept of the self. Somewhat paradoxically, that has also served to develop modern individualism, modern science, and the foundation of democracy and (free market) economy as well.

The externally projected concept of the self and internally reflective concept of the self are two sides of the same coin that must be united to be complete. Put another way, individualism must have both aspects within it (to be true individualism). The present crisis can only be overcome by establishing a more solid foundation of individualism: only by integrating the Eastern philosophy and Western philosophy with the concept of self can humankind be saved. I wrote this work with the aim of re-integrating the fractured concept of self so as to draw out measures for overcoming this crisis.
What is written here is only a part of the overall original work. The original work exceeds one million characters in the Japanese language. In the beginning, my intent was to write three volumes. The second volume was to cover society, economic structure, and the concept of "equality," and the third volume, the concept of "love" and the spiritual world. However, it appears to be impossible to complete all three volumes in the limited amount of time.
This work itself consists of three parts, each with an introduction and conclusion. There are interludes that connect the different parts, as well as a comprehensive introduction and summary that bring them together.
In Part I, the concept of self is defined.
The self is a being that is the prerequisite for all other beings. The self is a pure being. The self is a complete being. The self is an absolute being. The self is a unique being. The self is a subjective being. The self is the only being that can realize itself. The self is an object of indirect cognition (consciousness). Such self exists only now. The self does not include any of the things created by the type of consciousness referred to as the sense of values.
Despite its character as a subjective being it is an object of indirect cognition (consciousness), and this has given rise to all sorts of problems. The cause of confusion in human consciousness is created structurally by this mode of being of the self.
The proposition "I think, therefore, I am" is merely a proof of the existence of the self. Whether it is thinking, or eating, or playing, the conclusion (that I exist) does not change. Therefore, while "thinking" serves to prove the existence of the self, it cannot define the self's existence (being).
After defining the concept of the self, we move to the definition of "good" and "evil."
The cause for all actions of a given person lies with the self. It is the self that gives rise to the consciousness of a sin or a crime. A sin (or a crime) is the cause, and the punishment is the result. Unless there is the consciousness of the sin, the question of punishment does not arise. For this reason, only the self can render punishment. The value criterion for good and evil depends upon the self. A human being is punished only by his or her own sense of values. For this reason, the "good" is a good defined by the self. Social justice is established by a contract based on such good defined by the various selves who are involved.

Part II starts with the definition of God.
It is God that makes it possible for a being to be a being. God is a being that transcends the self. All beings and things that exist in this world depend upon God. God is the source of all. God is not restrained by anyone or any thing, and it exists by itself. While the self is dependent upon God, God is not dependent upon the self. God is an absolute being. It is a pure being. God is a universal being. God is omnipresent.
God does not need human beings. Human beings need God. Even if humankind were to disappear, that would not have any impact whatsoever on God. God existed long before humankind came into existence, and it will continue to exist long after humankind becomes extinct.
Yet, the question arises: why does the human being need God? One reason is that the human being is the object of indirect cognition (consciousness). The self cannot recognize itself by itself. But a being who is not recognized is the same as a being who does not exist. Since the self is an object for indirect cognition (consciousness), the self can become conscious of itself only through relationships with others that transcend it. For this reason, the self needs a being that transcends it.
Secondly, human beings need other beings and things not only physically but also spiritually. God is the being that makes it possible for the self to be itself, and the spiritual and physical space that God has prepared for the self is the true world.
Third, consciousness needs God. The society that we live in is a world created by consciousness. Such a world is incomplete: it is a relative world, and an unstable and uncertain world. The consciousness of this instability and uncertainty leads the self to search for God, and to need God.
Fourth, unless there is the premise of a being that transcends the self, the self will not be able to distinguish itself and others, and the self will not be able to become independent. The pure self can affirm itself only by being conscious of its relationship with others. For this reason, it needs a God that transcends it.
Fifth, to deny God, the entity which enables the self to be a being, leads to self-denial.
Finally, the denial of God would ultimately render the self's own sense of values absolute. There arises the sense of oneself as an absolute being. Everything that the self's consciousness creates is relative, and any attempt to understand an absolute being with a relative consciousness is an error. As noted earlier, the denial of an absolute being leads to self-denial. If the self were to avoid such self-denial, it would become necessary to make absolute what the self creates. This is why anyone who denies God makes himself or herself into God. However, what the self's consciousness creates is but an illusory shadow.
Next, I will clarify the fundamental basis of scientific consciousness.
A being is absolute. From the instant a being becomes aware of the object and seeks to identify and differentiate the object through the working of the consciousness, the object becomes relative. For this reason, the world created by the self's consciousness is a relative world. This kind of working of consciousness is called conversion of an absolute consciousness of the object to the relative consciousness. The world that exists in the consciousness is a world created by the consciousness.
Once the consciousness of the object is made relative, then various concepts are born. Within it, I shall clarify the way to grasp "time" and "space." Later, I will give definitions of the place (arena) and structure. These theses are the philosophical foundation of not only the natural sciences, but also the social sciences, of which I will discuss more later.
In Part III we will define individualism, analyze the rights and obligations based upon individualism, and discuss the mode of the social system that is based upon these rights and obligations.
An individual is an objectification of the self. The self, as a subjective being, as is, cannot be treated as an object. Therefore, it is necessary to turn the self into an autonomous entity and define the self's characteristics. At that juncture, the fact that the self is an object of indirect cognition (consciousness) assumes a great deal of significance.
Both the political system and economic system must be founded upon individualism. With that as the premise, a political democracy and market economy must be grasped structurally. This is because many of the contradictions that we face today are institutionally based problems, and merely grasping matters on a phenomenal level cannot clarify the true causes. Light must be shed on the structure behind the phenomena that are occurring today. Finally, I would like to clarify the philosophical basis that will identify such structures.
Due to the limited space available, some points are simplified and the reader may feel that there are jumps in logic. However, in this paper, all the individual theses are based upon rigorous verification.
There is little chance that I will ever be recognized as a philosopher in Japan. Anyone or any work that goes beyond what is established in Japan is rarely given any acknowledgment, let alone recognition. Those who lack proper schooling or membership in academic societies will certainly go unrecognized. As such, I am not even given an opportunity to present my views.

The Copyright of these webpages including all the tables, figures and pictures belongs the author, Keiichirou Koyano.Don't reproduce any copyright withiout permission of the author.Thanks.

Copyright(C) 2001 Keiichirou Koyano