Time, as part of space-time, is one of those basic physical universe realities. Or is it?  

I have just read the latest collection of articles from the Scientific American. The accounts were fascinating and rather diverse. But before I comment, let’s review my first engagement with time in the Taxonomy.

You may recall that I identified four experiences or realms of time in, of all places, the production of goodness. There is linear time: the time of the hero. I mean you and me in our daily struggle. Then there is cyclic time: the time More...

The scientific culture of the 20th century had a phobia of subjectivity and anything to do with the mind. Not unreasonably, because scientists saw how subjective intrusions disrupt thinking and investigating.

For much of the last century, psychology divided into two battling camps. On the one side were psychoanalytic sympathizers who aligned with Freud's discoveries but not his scientific bent. On the other side were scientific behaviourists who ruled that the mind was non-existent or irrelevant and impossible to study with empirical methods. Most natural scientists were sceptical More...

ORIGINALLY WRITTEN IN 2012 but not posted till 2025.

This life is not just physics and biology. 

It is also experiential and social. Any reduction or contempt for this meta-reality (metaphysics) prevents us studying how we are creative and ethical. When we create or make a moral choice it feels real because it is real. Being real, it has real-world effects apart from neuronal firing. Ignoring these effects is dangerous, really dangerous—just as ignoring a safe falling onto your head is dangerous. On the other hand, you can ignore your neurons entirely: there will not be the tiniest difference to what happens. 

If you have a scientific bent, as I do, then you will believe that anything that is real can and should be studied.  I call this meta-reality: psychosocial reality.

Grasping personal psychosocial reality is tricky because More...

It's the season of goodwill. 

But where does goodwill come from? It's not in a microprocessor or accessible via a software command. It must emerge from that strange but familiar entity: the human spirit.

It is possible that the discovery of a taxonomy of human elements, THEE, represents some sort of strange convergence between scientific and spiritual traditions. I would like to explore that in this blog and the next.

I claim that my taxonomic inquiry is scientific because I draw on the common features and values that are traditionally associated with the scientific method. For example, I emphasize empirical study (even if the focus is a metaphysical realm). I also appeal to logical analyses and rationality. I actively seek validation and testing. I uphold consistency and coherence as virtues. And I positively welcome debate and criticism of formulations. I do not claim to perfection in these matters, but they are my beacons and primary criteria.

I also find myself having to recognize that the process is spiritual because More...

We all want to know reality. But have we become too dependent on scientific knowing? 

The sad truth of science is that the best it can be is less wrong. But as we live our everyday lives, being less wrong can be not good enough. 

Don’t get me wrong: for knowing, being less wrong is wonderful—it is a great advance. But living is more than knowing. Living is loving, it’s committing, it's creating, it’s telling it how it is. It is acting without knowing.  

In modern society, we often want to know More...