I'm Looking For A Term That May Not Yet Exist

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by NorEaster

 

I'm looking forward to reading your ideas. Considering what you mentioned in your OP, I'm going to just throw some words out there:

- veritics

I'm hoping you actually coin the term yourself. Good luck.

Maybe veritism....?

This is being good for my own personal vocabulary, if good for anything at all.

Okay, so I'm going to assume that there's no such term, and therefore no one who's established any theory that covers the whole of physical (material and non-material) reality. That's good to know. Surprising, but good to know. Thanks for the help on this.

reply to post by NorEaster


the term is called,, reality,.,.,.,.,. or existence,.,,.., that which exists..,,.,. or the word,, everything

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by NorEaster

 

the term is called,, reality,.,.,.,.,. or existence,.,,.., that which exists..,,.,. or the word,, everything

This bit of the OP is what I'm trying to give a term to..."My search is for a term that describes the study of that which includes all of these fields, while being based solely on logical inference, that seeks to establish exactly what exists as factual and definable. A field that brings physics and metaphysics and philosophy and all that exists and is brought into existence, together as one full reality narrative based on clearly defined dots that are securely connected."

I don't think that the terms "reality" or "existence" or "everything" communicates what I'm suggesting if I were to use it in a written presentation to a traditional publisher. You have to admit that "reality" and "existence" and "everything" are pretty widely used, fairly broad terms. They wouldn't be much use in that sort of effort. I'm trying to nail a good term that isn't being used to describe any other kind of research examination. Something that has the same specificity as physics or theology or philosophy.

reply to post by NorEaster


ok i see,.,.,.,. but you have to admit what you are looking for,, is summed up in the word " everything".,,..,

I would use.,.,. absolute truth,..,.,.,

you are searching for the truth of truth,,, what exactly everything is,, what exactly it does, what it is doing, what it is capable of doing, how it is,, how it does what it does, why it is, when it is,,,

every answer to every question that can be asked about what exists,,, is reality as it is,,, or everything as it is,,,.

not a theory of everything by biased or fallible men,,, but the knowledge of everything,, or truth,.,.

is this the type of research or writing you are performing? a "TOE",.,,. connecting chemistry, physics, biology, philosophy, geometry, math, all science, time, anthropology,,.,,.

how the human condition relates to nature and the universe.. etc.etc.etc..

the thing is we have to interact with nature for so much time, with so many instruments that havent even been made yet,, to come confident in painting 1% of the picture,, i believe at least,, only now since many scientific discoveries have been made about biology, chemistry, and physics, have we been able to chip even a little bit into truth.,.,

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by NorEaster

 

is this the type of research or writing you are performing? a "TOE",.,,. connecting chemistry, physics, biology, philosophy, geometry, math, all science, time, anthropology,,.,,.

how the human condition relates to nature and the universe.. etc.etc.etc..

It is a "theory of Everything" but focusing on how everything came into existence and why. I was calling it "AutoGenesisism" because of the fact that it all came into existence - well - on its own (considering that the imperatives and qualifiers that launched, steer, and drive it all are part of all that exists as well), but it seems as if that term describes my conclusions as opposed to the actual effort to determine those conclusions. The effort is what I'm trying to describe with this term. Not the conclusion, and not a description of what's being examined.

reply to post by NorEaster

reply to post by NorEaster


Allologyology

reply to post by maryhinge

That's a really funny one

reply to post by NorEaster

Omniogenesiology

Originally posted by yeahright
reply to post by NorEaster

 

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Exegetic objective epistemological sesquipedalianism

Suddenly I'm channeling Dick Cavett, and I don' think he's even dead yet.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

I had "exegetic objective epistemological sesquipedalianism" on a short list. The Numerological implications are dire, though.

True story.


Allologyology - that may just be genius.

Originally posted by D1ss1dent

reply to post by NorEaster

 

Omniogenesiology

I don't know. That suggests that everything emerges in spontaneous genesis, which is a cool idea that will always be inconveniently untrue. That's the tough part of this effort. The term has to accurately describe something that is - itself - accurate. I would've thought that someone out there in academia would have taken on this effort by now, and a White Paper would exist that, at least, provides the terminology associated with this level of examination. This is really odd.

Originally posted by NorEaster
I had "exegetic objective epistemological sesquipedalianism" on a short list.

Oxymoronically incompatible.