Expressive Organicism: An Outline, #2.

“Marmorslottet/Marble Castle Rock Formation, Norway,” by C. Brown (Wikimedia Commons, 2021)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3. PART II

The essay below will be published in two installments; this, the second and final installment, contains section 3.

But you can also download and read or share a .pdf of the complete text of the essay, including the REFERENCES, by scrolling down to the bottom of this post and clicking on the Download tab.

Expressive Organicism: An Outline

3. PART II

25. Metaphysically, I see no reason to go beyond monism. Once we grasp the inner nature of matter, we grasp the emergence (if it is a form of emergence at all!) of matter to mind, and the relation of part to whole—or where these abstractions are incorrect—as well as the strange appearance of the subjective gap. Any dualism in this regard is just a missing puzzle piece which is explained away by invoking a new category. Already the idea of emergence implies surprise: how did this or that phenomenon arise from this substrate? Well, it is no wonder if one knows what to expect. The surprise stems from ignorance: to ignorant eyes only, emergence looks like a wondrous thing that is unexplainable. The knowing mind, however, expects it as being fully possible and even implied within the potential of matter. The potential of matter unfolds continuously.

26. So, the monism we require is one that demonstrates a tremendous depth, alongside its width. We may imagine it as a metaphysical picture in which the phenomena give way to the noumenon to emerge and to be apprehended. If anything, its well is a Kantian noumenon, the depths of which are constituted by potentials. Given certain pressures, these potentials develop to give rise to universes. Yet, the depth of the noumena can be non-conceptually apprehended before they can be conceptually understood. The non-conceptual precedes and interacts with the conceptual (Paans, 2020e). As usual, we started at the wrong end, thinking of concepts as instruments of knowledge. But in reality, we knew long before we had concepts. Evolutionary speaking, concepts and language are late. Hence knowledge is not impossible outside them.

27. Departing from this deep monism, we can construct an account of the universe as an essentially processual and dynamic topos—that is, a plane on which various manifestations appear and make themselves felt. There is an elective affinity with Meister Eckhart here: when Eckhart states that “God is a place,” he means to indicate the very continuity between cosmos and human lived experience. The idea that “God is omnipresent” has everything to do with the fact that the creativity of the universe manifests itself inside us and around us, as well as through us (Hanna and Paans, 2022). Eckhart does not invoke an external deity, nor an immanent one: he simply calls the structure of the universe “god,” like Spinoza would also later do. We should take that as a way of saying that nature gives rise to feelings of awe, granting us a way into the domain we habitually describe as divine or numinous. This sense of wonder leads right into what Rudolf Otto called “the idea of the Holy” (Otto, 1924). This sense of awe and wonder is empathically not an attempt to sneak in some form of dubious mysticism. Instead, it is an attempt to rid ourselves of the type of mysticism that has been used as the ultimate “God-of-the-gaps” argument, by which all that is (currently) inexplicable is relegated to the realm of Divine power. This is shallow mysticism at best and outright superstition at worst.

28. Instead, the sense of awe opens up a fully natural numinous dimension that provides meaning into our lives and that deepens out our anthropological place in the world. It enriches our being-in-the-world. Experiencing the numinous re-orients our being-towards-the-world. Both stances—being-in (bevinden) and being-towards (verhouden)—are complementary. They are stages of a single process that we can call dispositioning. In one sense, to disposition oneself is to position oneself in a certain way and through a certain attitude. But is also the creation of a disposition or dispositif in the Foucauldian sense of the term. But unlike Foucault, who analyzed the influences on power and institutions on individuals, we should reclaim the right to shape our own lives, forming so many dispositifs to jointly re-orient our being-towards-the-world.

29. But, looking at the natural universe, we must conclude that it constitutes an infra-environment or interworld (the Merleau-Pontyan l’entremonde or the “flesh of the world”), only a small section of which is inhabitable (Merleau-Ponty, 1968). We experience cosmic radiation, diffuse effects of solar bodies, the influence of sunspots. If anything, the universe is a place of extremes, some of which we can comprehend, but some of which we can’t even begin to comprehend. An infra-environment is the notion that is inspired by, but significantly extends Timothy Morton’s provocative concept of the hyperobject (Morton, 2013). However, the notion of infra-environment applies the lessons of Morton’s account to our living environment as such, to overcome fragmented ways of thinking about it and its effects on us. Most importantly, we must unlearn the habit of thinking of ourselves as standing back from the universe. As living organisms, we do indeed maintain a temporal boundary to our environment (indeed, this is the premise of organismic life itself), but this boundary is porous. The biosphere is another boundary in which we are embedded, but which is also porous.

30. Nature does not know one. It knows only a unity which is not a number, but which is shot through on all sides with porosity and potentiality—a dynamic One, close to what the Neoplatonists envisioned. To think of this unity with the numerical concept “One” is a first-class mistake, giving rise to the classical problem of the “One and the Many.” The One is not a class of objects of which only one instance exists. It is a unifying principle organically connecting all scales of the cosmos. To ask why one can lead to many is to misunderstand its nature. In the One, all qualities and attributes are present as potentials—that is, as belonging to what Aristotle calls the category of potentia. Not all of these potentials will be realized. Some of them will never actualize, because earlier events have determined conditions in such a way that they will not arise. From the viewpoint of expressive organicism, this mistake is to be expected, but could have been avoided if we had paid heed to the porosity inhering in Nature – as all cosmic, biological and minded structures form an interconnected unity, the use a number to designate their metaphysical character or relations is a mistake. The numerical “One” is itself an abstraction, leading unwittingly into the idea of a simple unit that can be isolated and that is impervious. So many debates on the nature of the Soul have hinged exactly on this point.

31. The universe is on this account not only non-deterministic from the very beginning, but also aleatoric. It determines development corridors that allow some leeway and bounded flexibility. Non-determinism is not the same as indeterminism. It is not that there are no mechanisms that determine subsequent events. These mechanisms cannot be constructed as chains of necessary events that can be constructed forward in time. Hard determinism is a no-go from the very start, just like indeterminism. Both options conceptualize no ways in which freedom and purposive action could arise. Non-determinism simply holds that for each event, there a multitude of options that could follow. The cases where we have identified exceptions to this rule do not prove universal determinism. Instead, in the overwhelming number of cases where a degree of possibility is involved, we would better say that the chance that we accurately predict an outcome, or a cause is very slim and may be best probabilistically approached.

Each event determines the “depth” and “width” of the corridor of possibilities that follows it. It determines it to some degree. If we look backward, there is no direct causation, but direct possibilisation. The Aristotelian model of causality only holds locally, but to be sure, it was only ever intended to be a common-sense theory of causality generalized over the entire cosmos. A staff moves a stone and is moved by a hand—yes, but that falls under a local model of causality.

32. This vision of temporary unity and ceaseless change leads necessarily to an auxiliary foundation for morality: our existential fragility. The snowflake is beautiful but disappears at a whim. The coral reefs disappear already when the water temperature increases. Everything exists in a dynamic balance that is at the same time resilient and fragile. If we transpose this insight to the human realm, we find that the realization of this fragility is a source of anxiety and altruism alike, as well as that of the arts, in both their fleeting and permanent forms.

33. Continuing with the arts and its focus on objects, we can see that this type of thinking valorises the singularizing potential of expression. If an object is singularized, it is made to stand out—so to speak, to express itself. We access it and it entangles with us; it wrests itself loose from its context, while remaining a part of it, yet never being reducible to it—it is caught up in a reciprocity which Merleau-Ponty call schiasma, but that we might also conceptualize as Alfonso Lingis’s “ecological zones” (Lingis, 2001). This is then a mereological aesthetics. And it can’t be otherwise, since we deal with the infra-environment only obliquely and incompletely. We never perceive an object as fully separate; we only represent it as such (Paans, 2021b). Yet, there is Schellingian “indivisible remainder” that is inferred and apprehended rather than directly encountered (Paans, 2024).

34. The notion of an infra-environment is deeply conflicted and paradoxical. On one hand, even a primeval forest is an infra-environment that confronts us with our finitude. On the other hand, our built environment constitutes an ecological habitat of its own. We survive in it, yet it makes us ill, warps our agential capacities through “instructive spaces” and enables our greatest economic, industrial, cultural and artistic expressions. Its extreme achievement comes at a price of extreme health deterioration, fragmentation, rootlessness and alienation. This is why “Arcadia”, “Paradise” or the “wilderness” is set up as against the polis. Or, alternatively, “landscape” fulfils this role—a mediated, tamed wildness in which our aesthetic continuity with the cosmos can be grasped. This is what gives all landscape poetry its poetic force.

35. Such poetic force provides what our organic systems require most – stimulating symbols, leading even to complete cosmologies, from Heaven/Hell schemas to models like Chaos/Order. We had symbols without referents long before we had spoken language. And this is why we can still apprehend. Apprehension is the earliest form of (essentially embodied) cognition, albeit non-conceptual and raw, discursively inarticulate and emotive. But it is in the interplay of organic process, symbol, and signifier that thought-shapers and action-shapers exert their influence, either in their destructive or generative sense (Hanna and Paans, 2021; Paans and Ehlen, 2022).

36. However, this still-existent core has evolved within us, and gives rise to our artistry, aesthetic feeling, and our capacity of appreciation and immersion, and thereby to our access to the numinous. The “Idea of the Holy” can at least be partially explained in anthropologic and evolutionary terms, without in any way being reducible to it. If only because our language fails us, and its domain of application is limited. In the sense, Wittgensteinian pessimism or reluctance about the confines of language is entirely justified.

37. Nihilism is the inevitable upshot of any modernistic, mechanistic worldview. It is the despair of a bleak, meaningless world ruled by goals, aims, targets and the immanent possibility of being outcast. That we are alone in the universe is not our burden, but that we are stuck on a planet with the morally most depraved is. If one would be alone on the planet, succumbing to nature would be the existential threat. But our existential fragility is unfortunately punctuated by events like wars, conflicts and deceit—all caused by our fellow creatures.

38. To live in the endless now (not the Buddhist present) is to practice creative piety. It is the art of “living the living presence,” a true Lebensphilosophie based on the ecological view, the full awareness of our existential fragility and the anti-purposive mindset of organicism.

39. The endless now is the place beyond the end: the realm where aesthetics and eschatology fully coincide to give us the momentary view of a world without humanity, in its full thisness (sūnyata). It is the aesthetic world of Caspar David Friedrich’s Nietzschean “Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog,” of the wandering music of Valentin Silvestrov, the desert, the full impact of our place in the world by stepping outside it (see, e.g., Paans, 2020b). It is the space beyond time.

40. As such, the most intimate experience of Life (with a capital L) is the chiasma: the reciprocal proximation and distancing to behold Life itself. To grasp Life fully, we cannot rely just on knowing through logos or doxa but should include also aesthetically apprehending it in a moment of metanoia. In aesthetic experience, two movements unfold simultaneously, an implicate and explicate order. The first is one of immersion in the work: being pulled into the now. The second is one of observing the feeling of being immersed and appreciating that particular feeling as an event or experience.

41. Overlaid on this double movement of immersion-distancing is the imaginative experience of disintegration-integration. For Kant, this constitutes the sublime: being immersed to such a degree in a work that the imagination first breaks down, only to restructure the contents it encounters. Thus, we have the inscape, the positive disintegration and the creative synthesis as steps in an organic process of appreciation.

42. Coming-to-grips or integrating mundane and sublime experiences, then, becomes an art – the art of living. It is a “searching grasping” or cognitive tactility or hapticity exercised on objects of cognition – it is the overcoming of the subject-object split through immersive subjective experience. However, it is a continuous and sharply disjointed process. Synthesis is not a moment, but a sequence of superimposed steps.

43. This can only be done from a first-person viewpoint. Despite the fact that it can be communicated, my philosophy is adjectival (Paans, 2022f). It is arguable that it can be imitated, but one must become convinced not only by the strength of its arguments, but equally by its coherence as a whole, and its applicability across a variety of domains. Philosophy, in the end, is practical. It is Life itself in practice, or auto-affectivity.

44. The chiasma, or productive reciprocity between subject and objectis nothing else than the operation of creative piety, the moment we experience eternity in a raindrop, or regard the world as if we have already passed on. It is—in Buddhist terms—the “eye that does not see itself,” and therefore acquires a kind of experiential freedom. Especially free from hasty judgments or instrumental reason. What is called “Enlightenment” is the propensity for moral action by growing up and assuming one’s responsibility. But to assume such responsibility demands a revolution of the heart, which cannot come about without a feeling of humility.

45. This is why metanoia is such an important concept. It is not just a moment of prostrating oneself, but of consciously taking up a new role, position and attitude in the world. It derives from the Greek μετάνοια (Latinized: metanoia, literally “transforming one’s mind”). In positive psychology, it represents the process of breaking down and building up. In rhetoric, it implies a moment of qualifying a prior statement, amplifying, or diminishing its intensity. As such, it plays with the fact of the limit-experience, in the transcendental sense of the term. As Hajime Tanabe has worked out in one of his major philosophical work Philosophy as Metanoetics, the practice of metanoetics or the viewpoint of repentance is a necessary condition for practicing philosophy (Tanabe, 2016).

“Repentance” does not mean that one must feel guilty or repent for a prior sin. It is simply the viewpoint of epistemic humility, accepting that the place where we are now is the consequence of prior choices that can be reversed if we wish to do so. The fact that this has not happened is the tragic human condition. It is the tension between the worst and the best of human instincts that makes a repentance or tristesse necessary, in order to avoid playing god and relapsing into passive fatalism.

46. Put in Kantian terms: we can rationally self-legislate. We can devise laws and voluntarily decide to adhere to them. But the attitude that informs these laws (and customs or habits, and thus the shape of our thoughts and ultimately our brains) determines what kind of laws comes into existence. Moral laws emerge under certain transcendent conditions. Whereas Kant originally intended his transcendental idealism as a theory of experience and its limits, he realized quickly its import for morality. The categorical imperative, the doctrines of virtue and right, and the Religion within the Bounds of Mere Reason are all pre-occupied with this question: which boundary conditions set norms for the moral laws that appear?

47. Even before that question is answered, an assertion is made: laws are made by individuals and collectives that are embodied, embedded and extended. They function in an anthropological place or situation. Whether we call this embeddedness Life, Process, or Reality does not matter; what should be recognized is that any form of Divine Command theory cannot constitute a functioning morality. It is abstract, disembodied, and since it is not from this world, it has nothing to say here. The pernicious idea that a Deity gives out commands serves to cover up the fact that we ourselves make laws, relegating our moral responsibility to a divine agent in order not to be confronted with its consequences.

48. Metanoia transforms the mind. But we should not just understand it as the brain or the spirit, but frame it, following the latest cognitive-scientific insights as enactive, embodied, embedded and extended—a 4E conception. In so doing, the world becomes a part of the individual. Or, as Karl Jaspers put it: the landscape, culture, customs, arts, and traditions become the ground of our being in the world (Dasein), or our way of inhabiting it (bevinden). Consequently, if we transform our minds by adopting and cultivating new attitudes (creative piety—see, e.g., Hanna and Paans, 2022), then we can build a new world that reflects these values. The tragic note is that this is always a live possibility, but the collective choice is usually not made to act on this agency.

49. Metanoia and prostration imply deliberately adopting an attitude, changing one’s relation to the world through the body: opting for a different being-towards-the-world and actively changing one’s dispositif or verhouding. There is a positioning implied in changing the lived, first-person experience. One changes one’s living in the world, one’s place in the world, and thereby alters one’s perspective, over against reality or a deity or divine and/or cosmic order. The depth of one’s anthropological place can be unlocked and accessed or tapped-into by positioning oneself differently. This implies a new range of emotional, affective and imaginative attitudes. Possibilities that were formerly unimaginable or inconceivable become in fact conceivable. In turn, this progression (the Kantian progressus through reflection) is a process driven by moral imagination, of finding, exploring, and inhabiting one’s place in the world.

50. Voluntarily to self-legislate implies the practice of metanoia (or its Japanese counterpart: zange). It demands that we follow through on our commitments. However, this leads into a conflict with regard to our desires: sometimes we would like to cut a corner or are sabotaged by our own bodies. This is a double tragedy, as we are trapped in our embodiment and its accompanying drives. There is agency which rises above this predicament (what Max Scheler aptly called “spirit”), but this requires accepting pain. pulling away from our demand for instant gratification, and overcoming our worst instincts.

51. Language evolves to describe the new moral space in which we find ourselves. This is why a new existentialism is needed. Opposed to existentialist and relativist nihilism, this neo-existentialism needs to conceptualize the human being and his existence into account, but this time from a radically entangled and ecological viewpoint. If we are continuous with the cosmos, then the frame of reference that we use to situate ourselves and take stock of our position should reflect the attitudes fostered by metanoia and creative piety. All this implies a renewed relation to our existential fragility. We must come to terms with it in a changing world. The question of inhabiting, or of Being in a brave new world—a world beyond the end, perhaps?

52. Coming to terms with fragility is to come to terms with finitude. Indeed, the experience of fragility is one form of experiencing finitude. However, we must distinguish between finitude as finality (i.e. the loss of the subjective viewpoint) and finitude as processualism. The individual viewpoint vanishes upon death, but the transcendental subject (whether human or not) endures. This is a fundamental point that Schopenhauer touches on in his work. The Will endures, the individual vanishes. The premise of all religions is to reverse the order, and make the individual endure by obliterating the Will (under the form of individual desires), and to merge with a Deity.

53. But this amounts to a refusal to accept what we truly are, even while new and fulfilling attitudes might be cultivated through spiritual practices. To inhabit the cosmos first and foremost means to experience our place in it. By striving for individual immortality, we make a first-class mistake, and by seeking to govern even beyond the grave, we exacerbate our suffering in the present. It is also a misunderstanding of our place in the cosmos: we cannot escape the natural order, for we are radically entangled in it. Shuffling off this mortal coil is an impossibility, and to desire it a misunderstanding of Life. Immortality, not mortality is the problem in subjective experience. To live Life fully, on the other hand, is the core philosophical issue.

REFERENCES

(Hanna and Paans, 2020). Hanna, R. and Paans, O. “This is the Way the World Ends: A Philosophy of Civilization Since 1900, and A Philosophy of the Future.” Cosmos & History 16.2: 1-53. Available online at URL = <http://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/viewFile/865/1510>.

(Hanna and Paans, 2021). Hanna, R. and Paans, O. “Thought-Shapers.” Cosmos & History 17.1: 1-72. Available online at URL = <http://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/view/923>.

(Hanna and Paans, 2022). Hanna, R. and Paans, O. “Creative Piety and Neo-Utopianism: Cultivating Our Global Garden.” Cosmos and History 18.1: 1-82. Available online at URL = <https://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/view/1017>.

(Krippendorf, 2008). Krippendorf, K. “Social Organizations as Reconstitutable Networks of Conversation.” Cybernetics and Human Knowing 15.3-4: 149-161. Available online at URL = <http://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/135>.

(Lingis, 2001). Lingis, A. “Ecological Consciousness: Reflections on Hominids and Other Thinking Animals.” Critical Horizons 2, 2: 283–300.

(Meraleau-Ponty, 1968). The Visible and the Invisible. Ed. Trans. By A. Lingis. Evanston IL: Northwestern Univ. Press.

(Morton, 2013). Morton, T., Hyperobjects. Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World. Minneapolis MN: Univ. of Minnesota Press.

(Otto, 1924). Otto, R., The Idea of the Holy. An Inquiry Into the Non-Rational Factor in the Idea of the Divine and its Relation to the Rational. Trans. J.W. Harvey. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.

(Paans, 2019a). Paans, O. “The Generic Eternal: Modernism, Alienation and the Built Environment.” Borderless Philosophy 2: 207–256. Available online HERE.

(Paans, 2019b). Paans, O. “The Expanse of Thought: Kantian Imagination, Différance, and Creativity.” Contemporary Studies in Kantian Philosophy 4: 85-98. Available online at URL = <https://www.cckp.space/single-post/2019/06/17/cskp4-2019-the-expanse-of-thought-kantian-imagination-diff%C3%A9rance-and-creativity>.

(Paans, 2020a). Paans, O. “Organicist Metaphysics: A Hybrid Interpretation.” Against Professional Philosophy. 16 November. Available online at URL: <https://againstprofphil.org/2020/11/16/organicist-metaphysics-a-hybrid-interpretation/>.

(Paans, 2020b). Paans, O. “Echoes of the Future: Apprehensive Aesthetics for a Bygone World.” Borderless Philosophy 3: 238–263. Available online HERE.

(Paans, 2020c). Paans, O. “Opening Up Towards the Non-Conceptual: From Kantian Judgment to Creative Oscillation.” Contemporary Studies in Kantian Philosophy 5: 116–131. Available online at URL = <https://www.cckp.space/single-post/2020/06/15/CSKP5-2020-Opening-Up-Towards-the-Non-Conceptual-From-Kantian-Judgment-to-Creative-Oscillation>.

(Paans, 2020). Paans, O. “Meditations & Mediations, #6: Inwardness.” Against Professional Philosophy. 22 July. Available online at URL: <https://againstprofphil.org/2020/07/22/meditations-mediations-6-inwardness/>.

(Paans, 2020e). Paans, O. “The Imaginative Spectrum: Kantian Imagination and Nonconceptual/Conceptual Interactions.” Contemporary Studies in Kantian Philosophy 5: 95–115. Available online at URL = <https://www.cckp.space/single-post/2020/06/15/cskp5-2020-the-imaginative-spectrum-kantian-imagination-and-non-conceptualconceptual-inte>.

(Paans, 2020f). Paans, O. “Postmodernity and the Politics of Fragmentation.” Borderless Philosophy 3: 264–310. Available online HERE.

(Paans, 2021a). Paans, O. “How To Do Real Metaphysics: 26 Theses.” Borderless Philosophy 4 (2021): 198–227. Available online at URL = <https://www.cckp.space/single-post/bp-4-2021-otto-paans-how-to-do-real-metaphysics-26-theses>.

(Paans, 2021b). Paans, O. Paans, O. “A Science of Singulars: On the Nature of Architectural Science.” Against Professional Philosophy. August 2021. Available online at URL =<https://againstprofphil.org/2021/08/08/a-science-of-singulars-on-the-nature-of-architectural-science-1-introduction/>.

(Paans, 2022a). Paans, O. “Expressive Organicism: Twenty-One Aphorisms.” Against Professional Philosophy. 9 January. Available online at URL = <https://againstprofphil.org/2022/01/09/expressive-organicism-twenty-one-aphorisms/>.

(Paans, 2022b). Paans. O. “Cold Reason, Creative Subjectivity: From Scientism and The Mechanistic Worldview To Expressive Organicism.” Borderless Philosophy 5: 161–212. Available online at URL = <https://www.cckp.space/single-post/bp-5-2022-otto-paans-from-scientism-and-mechanism-to-expressive-organicism-161-212>.

(Paans, 2022c). Paans, O. “Ontogenesis as Model for Design Processes.” In D. Lockton, P. Lloyd, and S. Lenzi (eds.) DRS2022: Bilbao. Available online at URL: <https://www.academia.edu/81681760/Ontogenesis_as_a_model_for_design_processes>.

(Paans, 2022d). Paans, O. “The New Subjective Body, #2: Modernity and Postmodernity—Two Types of Nihilism.” Against Professional Philosophy. 10 July. Available online at URL = <https://againstprofphil.org/2022/07/10/the-new-subjective-body-2-modernity-and-postmodernity-two-types-of-nihilism/>.

(Paans, 2022e). Paans, O. “Affinity and Expression: Kant, Nishida, and the Sensible Foundations of Expressivity.” Contemporary Studies in Kantian Philosophy 7: 29–46. Available online at URL = <https://www.cckp.space/single-post/cskp-7-2022-otto-paans-kant-nishida-and-the-sensible-foundations-of-expressivity-29-46>.

(Paans, 2022f). Paans, O. “Philosophy in a Newer Key: Outside the Professional Academy and Inside the Real World.” Against Professional Philosophy. 22-29 May 2022. Available online at URL = <https://againstprofphil.org/2022/05/22/philosophy-in-a-newer-key-outside-the-professional-academy-and-inside-the-real-world-1/> and <https://againstprofphil.org/2022/05/29/philosophy-in-a-newer-key-outside-the-professional-academy-and-inside-the-real-world-2/>.

(Paans, 2024). Paans, O. “Grasping the Grounds of Thought: The Thing-in-Itself, Actancy, and Ecology.” Journal of Philosophical Investigations 18, 47: 111–138. Available online at URL = <https://philosophy.tabrizu.ac.ir/article_18262.html>.

(Paans and Ehlen, 2022). Paans, O. and Ehlen, B. “Action-Shapers and their Neuro-Immunological Foundations.” Frontiers in Psychology. Available online at URL = <https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.917876/full>.

(Tanabe, H., 2016). Philosophy as Metanoetics. Trans. Y. Takeuchi, V. Viglielmo and J.W. Heisig. Berkeley CA: Univ. of California Press/Chisokudō Publications.

Download