Anger – Tunnel Vision – Narcissism – Blinders – What Big Picture? – Uninhibited Truthfulness – Respect – Inner Calm – Persistence – Skeptical Scrutiny – Perspective – Empirical – Transcendental – Balanced Growth – Oh, That Big Picture.

It’s easy to lose sight of the ‘Big Picture’.

Transcendental is ‘beyond’ and often thought of as superior and external. Why not internal? Regardless of my attempts at uninhibited truthfulness I know that I am nowhere near understanding the scope of my internal; but I can say it is definitely ‘beyond’. So if we consider transcendental as residing within, perhaps that thought has the potential to eliminate the ‘superiority’ factor, thus encouraging a more diligent search for understanding, which in turn will enable me to more efficiently close the gap. Complete understanding is unattainable. But if transcendent Truth and Wisdom lies within, that in itself puts me closer. At least it feels closer.

Maybe I’m just arguing semantics. Maybe all of external is internal based on the fact that all of external is defined internally. According to Kant we can never truly know the external ‘thing’ because it is perceived and interpreted internally. Is it possible that by internalizing the external we have changed its true nature and we are seeing the ‘new’ thing in itself? Or, is it possible that the external is simply one’s perception of the (transcendent) internal, externalized; thus showing it originated as ‘the thing in itself’ internally? In other words, is the nature of that reality which is external to ourselves, actually an internal reality, meaning there is no external reality? For practical purposes, many would answer this last question ‘yes’; but what is the Truth? (I am exploring the Philosopher George Berkeley and empirical Idealism for further insight.)

The thought of no external reality is both comforting and disturbing.

Throughout the history of thought ‘Transcendental’ has presented in varying ways. For example, Transcendental Perspectivism appears to argue that for a truth to transcend it must be shared by two or more individuals. I have said before that my truth may not be your truth, but this (Transcendental Perspectivism) argument maintains that it must be someone’s truth (other than mine) to be transcendentally valid. I do agree with the argument that a given truth should not and cannot be forced upon another. Authoritarianism invalidates a transcendent truth. But I am not convinced that my truth must be shared to be transcendental. So how do these Transcendental Perspectivism views connect with the previous discussion on internal and/or external realities?

I suppose if a truth originates internally, the question becomes ‘Can it be shared?’ Internal Transcendence is often ‘Beyond Words‘, so I am coming around to a respectful disagreement with the Transcendental Perspectivist view that it is the act of sharing that definitively identifies the transcendent aspect of truth. Furthermore, if an experience is ‘Beyond Words’ that experience must be internalized, (or must originate from within), to maximize understanding. Once internalized the experience becomes personal and unique, and can/will never be completely shared, even if there were words to do it justice. In fact (or, in my opinion) to attempt to share it would actually cheapen it by creating even more distance from the truth to the perceiver to the receiver; much would be lost in the doubled process of interpretation and translation. (An excellent analogy would be listening to someone explain a deeply meaningful or disturbing dream; the listener loses interest, the dreamer is frustrated, and the dream loses meaning.) I believe the most meaningful transcendence possible is that which is held within to retain its value.

So whether or not there is an external reality, I think that (for now) these thoughts have brought me to the conclusion that internal transcendence has the most significant potential to close the gap on Truth, Wisdom, and Happiness. Again, that is not to say that there is not an external transcendent reality. I am undecided on that; at this point I am just posing questions. If the transcendental is represented by distinct and separate internal and external realities, those realities (as unattainable or unknowable as they may be) combined with empirical experience should all run on concurrent, parallel tracks as previously discussed ‘here‘ and ‘here‘.

I lean towards just one transcendental; originating, created, or re-created internally. But my thoughts on the nature of Transcendental Truth have just begun. I need further reading, study, and reflection.

A final thought – Transcendental Perspectivism encourages empathy and compassion for all opposing truths and/or for those who do not agree. I would disagree with this tenet, tempering it by substituting ‘respect’ for the ’empathy and compassion’. I strongly believe in ‘Do No Harm’. One should respect diverse opinions. However, empathy and compassion are not behaviors that I toss about lightly. They should be preceded by some serious listening and consideration, and the brutal fact is, I often have other priorities in terms of where my empathy and compassion is directed. Respect across the board – yes. Widespread pangs of empathy and compassion – yes. True, active, extended empathy and compassion (feelings that are beyond words) are reserved for those in my inner circle of empirical experience. And this example reflects the selfish, unique nature of transcendental thought, and its connection to empirical experience, which in turn supports the premise that the process is (somehow) internalized.