Rethinking Empirical Validity in Understanding Reality

Diary Entry 11/17/2024

There is an overwhelming amount of people that currently believe nothing which is not empirically provable is ontologically valid. To this, I raise the nature of embodied cognition: that which you prove must come to you, in your position as a physical observer, through those faculties your vehicle has fashioned for you.

Can you see the circular reasoning rearing its head?

This stance is biased, and without proper foundation. Any such proof that you derive from “physical” experiments are necessarily dictated to your observational capacity through the faculties of the flesh within which you reside. The relationship between oneself and “external” reality is always biased by those faculties to sense; it is not possible to know an atom in and of itself, only its impression on your sense faculties. Even the instruments we use are dictated to us through the symbology of our flesh; the symbols of our sense.

Therefore, to argue that only those things which are empirically “provable” is ontologically valid is to argue that only those things which you can perceive are valid. There is a serious flaw with this position: we are not the only animals with sense faculties, and therefore our supposed empirical, “objective” proof is invalidated quite readily by at least a good handful of animals non-human.

Our definitions of reality are intrinsically human, and to make the leap of faith towards believing our perspective is objective and “universal” is foolish, if not entirely insidious.

Empiricism is a methodology for gathering quality knowledge. It is the proper Art of knowing, not simply observing. This does not mean it should be taken as the standard of ontology. To do so is to lose one's soul; one's God-given right to be an integral and fundamental part of this Universe which we live.