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