To construct the new ontological world model based on triadic categories, that is needed for the "new historical epoch" (Günther), I introduce the triadic categorization of Peirce, who was a pioneering philosopher of the triad, and of Cyrill v. Korvin-Krasinski , a Christian philosopher, who also sought to overcome the dualism of the western mentality. He had noted the potential of the Christian idea of the Holy Trinity that was never used in Christian philosophy. He wrote in "Trina Mundi Machina":

The "new ontological world model" that I want to present is based on a triadic a priori principle, as opposed to the dualistic Aristotelian model. Being a priori, this triadic principle cannot be derived from any precedent world models. A "jump out of the system" of the old thought frames is needed, a meta-noia [8], as it is called in the Western spiritual tradition. The fundamental problem of the dualistic model (as it is for example expressed in the Cartesian "res extensa" - "res cogitans" duality) is the improper lumping together of categorically different aspects of subjectivity and mind. We may take Descartes' motto: "cogito ergo sum" as an expression of this improper coagulation, since he unquestioningly uses the intersubjective medium of language (and reasoning expressed in language) for establishing his own existence. The essential error in this procedure is to forget the mother language that we learn as part of our primary socialization, and by which our rational personality is formed in the first place. That is not an issue of our private subjectivity but of intersubjective cultural imprinting. The factor of a necessary pre-existence of culture that conditions the mind of humans, has been underrepresented in discourses such as that of Descartes. So, forgetting that he had to first acquire this mental equipment through a social process, he then comes to question the existence of other sentient human beings in his "mediationes". Gotthard Günther's work deals with the "logics of the historical process", which is the logic of language, and the cultural transmission, that has been misrepresented in most philosophical discourses so far.

The necessary pre-existence of language as the base of all our reasoning is the essential element that is lost in the materialistic and dualistic discourses. Logic itself (ie. the structure of language) is the "tertium datur" that is obliterated by Aristotelian discourses. The situation of dualism is like a discussion of the fishes who reason about the appearances of the world, but they completely forget the water in which they are swimming.

I will start with giving a short description of an ontological world model based on triadic categories. Because of the problematics with the philosophical concept of ontology, I will use the term "existential" to denote a kind of "being" that is colloquially meant, when saying "I am", or in the famous phrase of Hamlet: To be or not to be, that is the question (of ontology).

A diagram of the three existential world centers: SUB, OBJ, SEM

The schematic displays a grouping of the three existential world centers that occurs in many different guises in the history of ideas: Subjective, Objective, and Intersubjective. This is adopted from Popper and Eccles' "Three World model", (Popper 1977): "The self and its brain"; also Penrose (1994: 411-420). In deviation of Popper and Penrose, the ranking and ordering of the fundamental triadic arrangement is derived from Peirce 's categorization of Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness. Peirce described them as "a table of conceptions drawn from the logical analysis of thought and regarded as applicable to being". (Peirce , 1958, CP 1.301-1.353). The form of the enveloping outlines is derived from the symbol categories used by Günther for his morphograms (1980: 95-135), and a more mystical hint of Charpentier (1972: 86-107) [9]:

: SUB | : OBJ | : SEM

(the following is needed for the html-conversion which loses the graphic symbols)

circle : SUB | square : OBJ | triangle : SEM

In the following text, the graphical display is translated into a set notation which indicates the relative logical hierarchical dominance and subordinate inclusion of these worlds, SUB, OBJ, and SEM with parentheses, e.g.: writing a structure (SUB (OBJ)) indicates that the world SUB is treated as logically dominant with respect to OBJ: this would be the logical structure of the philosophical position of subjectivism, or solipsism.

This basic triad of existential world centers is just one example of a fundamental categorization of existential experience that humans have always tried to formulated in triadic form. We similarly find the triads of: soul (psychae), body (soma), and mind/spirit (pneuma), or the fundamental grammatical categories of language: I, It, and We, or the temporal categories of Past, Present, Future. In his book "Trina Mundi Machina" Korvin-Krasinski (1986) lists more of those fundamental basic triadic structures in the history of thought. There is a triadic correspondence in the philosophical realms of Aesthetics, Objective knowing, and Ethics, as well as the Platon ic concepts of the Beautiful (kalon), the True (alaethaes), and the Good (agathon).

Another diagram illustrates various configurations of this most fundamental logical triad:

{SUB } {OBJ } {SEM }

{I } {It } {We }

{Soul } {Body } {Mind }

{Feeling } {Willing } {Thinking } [10]

{Esthetics } {Objectivity } {Ethics } [11]

{The Beautiful } {The True } {The Good } [12]

{Pathos } {Logos } {Ethos } [13]

{Nephesch } {Basar } {Ruah } [14]

{diaballo } {symballo } {metaballo } [15]

{Past } {Present } {Future }

{Noun } {Verb } {Particle }

{Entity/State/Substance}{Process } {Relation } [16]

In the abstract, these conceptualizations each form a triadic logic structure of fundamental concepts of existence and experience (in philosophical terms: ontology and epistemology) as they have been expressed in philosophy or other, more mystical traditions, like the cabala. The categorical disjunctivity of these base elements follows a logic structure of the form:

{} {} {}

(the following is needed for the html-conversion which loses the graphic symbols)

{circle} X {square} X {triangle}

This we could also call a morphogram of triadic logics in Günther 's terminology. The categorical disjunctivity forms a qualitative extra-contexturality in an extended meaning of Günther's use of the term. Thus, these can be interpreted as the basic terms of a triadic logic of quality.

The human can be called a three-centered being [17]. Human experience is continually gyrating around these centers, in a very similar manner as the chaotic movement of a gravitational three-body ensemble. Sometimes, the switch is very fast, in fractions of seconds, sometimes one center is active for longer stretches of time. Societal organizations have built monumental cultural edifices around the one or the other pole, like science around OBJ, and religions around the idea. The basic defect of conventional philosophies and world views has been to obliterate the third center SEM. We are all immediately aware of our subjective experiences (SUB), and of the objects of our environment (OBJ). But whenever we think or talk, we are operating from the third center, language, ideas, concepts, the world of SEM (also called the SEMsphere). The Western philosophical tradition has so far self-speakingly, but completely oblivious to the fact, used the third center SEM, to create representations of the relations between the centers SUB and OBJ, which is the conventional Aristotelian logics, but it has not delved into the "reality" and the logics of the third center, SEM. The approaches between Hegel and Günther were good starts, but they have not brought about the full success that is needed. But we can take Günther's vivid descriptions of the monumental, heroic, Promethean project, in which the spiritual vanguard of humanity is engrossed since all those millennia, as a vision of the Titanic spirit of the endeavor, which is also the race for the future of humanity, because all the indications [18] convince us, that if this venture does not succeed, humanity (and the planetary biosphere) will be eaten up by its techno-capitalist machinistic creations (in analogy to Goethe's Zauberlehrling).

In the next paragraphs, I will give some explanations and examples to the basic existential triad of SUB, OBJ, and SEM.

SUB is the primal and most primitive experiential center. Our subjective awareness, our feelings, and our sense impressions are undeniable, primary, and without the cognizing subject, there would be nothing to cognize. All of experiencing happens only through the subjective center of the human being. As Penrose states (1994: 412) the world that we know most directly is that of our conscious perceptions (SUB). I can be in doubt about everything, but in order to be able to doubt, I must be (rephrased from Descartes : I think therefore I am). By this, my own being is prior to anything that I may experience. The prime argument of the subjectivist position is that indeed, the individual human subject is the only one doing the experiencing and the acting. Once the personality is formed in the second or third year of life, this is the "I" or ego center of the personality. A philosophical orientation that is centered on the subjective experience only is called subjective idealism or solipsism, and for this, only world SUB exists, everything else is a mirage. Peirce had put (the capacity of) "feeling" at the origin as Firstness. This is not subjectivity, but an undifferentiated precursor state.

Living from the position of subjectivism or solipsism, the observer concentrates on the immediate feelings and experiences in her body and sensorium, and is unaware of (or neglects) independent external agents. She experiences the world as a spectacle or theater which is staged for her. A baby that is being pampered and cared for might be in a solipsistic position, viewing her mother and her environment as an extension of self, not being aware of the limits of the subjective sphere. Another case would be the pampered son of a king, whose attendants strive to fulfill all his wishes before he even utters them [19]. Modern Virtual Reality scenarios contain more than a grain of salt of this solipsistic fantasy. A more refined, and reflected philosophical position connected with this is Phenomenology (Husserl , Heidegger ). Logically, subjectivism relegates the world of ideas and language either to subjective realm, or treats it as part of the (subordinate) phenomenal world.

(SUB (OBJ)) or (SUB (OBJ + SEM))

In a position of subjective idealism, the cognizing agent dominates the world, as perhaps expressed most succinctly by Berkeley : Esse est percipi. To be is to be perceived. This connection between being and perception can be traced back to Parmenides (1974), who stated that existence and perceptibility are convertible terms, but in the opposite direction:

To gar auto noein estin te kai einai: Indeed, the same is being and cognizing (B3).

In conventional philosophical usage, the term ontology applies only to the world of material objects in the physical universe: OBJ. (Encarta : Ontology): "Ontology... because it investigates the ultimate divisions within this universe, is more closely related to the physical world of human experience." The world of animals, especially lower ones, can be said to be driven by the ontological reality of the external world. (Günther 1976: 99-101). To perceive the world from this position and to fashion this into a logical system, is called material objectivism. According to this view, only the facts [20], ie. the entities of OBJ, deserve the label ontic, ie. being. Consciousness (and language) just reflects that being, and therefore, it is not (negation, mae-ontic [21]). (Also described in detail in Günther 1978a). This is essentially the positivist position outlined in Wittgenstein 's (1969) Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. In this view, the world OBJ is the first (World One, in Popper's diction) and only one existing [22]. This is the view of the positivistic, objectivistic and materialistic natural sciences. In a modified form of this view, dualism, the existence of subjectivity is assumed, but relegated to a subordinate position. This is for example the Cartesian dualism of OBJ and SUB.

(OBJ (SUB)) or (OBJ (SUB + SEM)) or (OBJ (SEM (SUB)))

The materialist view is that the physical universe is "in-itself", regardless of cognizing subjects, human or otherwise. This is evident because it existed long before humans, and will exist after humans [23]. It might be senseless to argue against the existence of an independently existing material world, but it is still an open question: independent of what?

The "ontological" [24] position of the world SEM poses a logical problem, which has been emphasized by Gotthard Günther: because all of western humanity's thinking follows the pseudo-Aristotel ian dualistic [25] thought tracks of a two-valued logic, it excludes a third position (tertium non datur) [26] . So, by conventional philosophy, the SEM world has to be either included in or logically subsumed under the SUB or the OBJ worlds. From Günther 's arguments it becomes clear, that without its proper logical foundation, the question of the existence of this third center SEM cannot even be asked, because there is no logical place for it in the current logical framework of the thought systems used by humanity. In other words, this is a paradoxical problem, and because of this logical problem, it seems difficult to find a naive position taking this world as primary. But it really is not: it is the world of commonal experience. And, more so than the world of men, it is the world of women. In cultures other than the Western European, this is quite the norm of human existence, and only the Western civilization with its high ranking of individualism and ego-centrism is more of an exception case among all human cultures of all times. In the Asian countries, notably India and China, the precedence of the family and the community over the individual is marked. Confucianism is a societal philosophy based on the principle of community [27]. Cultural anthropology (CA) and social researchers have speculated about ancient societies that lived in a pristine socio-commonism [28], being perpetually attuned to each other, and experiencing the I only in relation with the You [29]. This world also exists for lower life forms. The social insects, the bees, ants, and termites, live in a predominantly collective experience, even without language [30]. Theirs is a world of scents and vibrations which give their colony a coherence like that of a single organism. Further down the organic scale, the very fact that multi-celled organisms exist, and act as coherent wholes, proves that on this level also, there exist bonding and communicating mechanisms that can organize those individual cells to a whole. That those billions of cells are able to form a body at all, has mostly been taken for granted without question. The matter of commonal coherence versus individuality depends mainly on a tradeoff of the informational factors of communication, message propagation, discerning of signals, coordination, and action controlled by a center directed at a distant periphery. The fact that human societies are able to exist at all, is as dependent on the interplay of these factors, as the existence of animal bodies, and of the eukaryotic cells.

[8] Matth (4,17), Matth (18,3), Heidegger calls it: "Die Kehre"

[9] The triangle sign, of course, stems from that rich source of mythical lore which is inconspicuously embedded on every One-Dollar note that the US treasury has ever printed: The eye in the triangle.

[10] Korvin-Krasinski: Trina Mundi Machina, p. 295.

[11] The three main philosophical branches.

[12] Platon

[13] Korvin-Krasinski: Trina Mundi Machina, p. 294.

[14] Hebrew cabbalistic

[15] solve, coagula, transmutatio: Alchemy

[16] Treated more in depth further down as: The triad of Entity-Relation-Transaction

->ERT_TRIAD.

[17] Even if most people and most philosophies are aware only of two centers.

[18] The mene tekel signs appearing at the walls of our present civilization: the human race has already turned into a rat race.

[19] Such was the case with prince Gautama Siddharta, who later became known as the Buddha. He probably grew up and lived in this kind of solipsistic trance for about 25 years of his life, which was rudely shattered when he was finally accidentally confronted with death and suffering. The story may be a myth, but it serves extremely well to give an acute diagnostics of a psychological condition of the prince in contrast to which arose the later Buddhist philosophical edifice.

[20] Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 1: "Die Welt is alles, was der Fall ist".

[21] Günther (1976: 63-64)

[22] Existing, in terms of realia. This connects to the realism / nominalism debates of the Scholastic age. The question that was not asked then (and perhaps could not at the level of reflection available then), is about the "reality" of the nomina, ie. of the SEMsphere constructs.

[23] But as Günther (1976: xiv-xv) has pointed out in the quotations above, this is fashioned from a hopelessly parochial anthropo-centric representational position that direly needs to be cleared out together with a lot of other millennia-old conceptual garbage. The principle of reflection, which we generally associate with our human consciousness, is neither confined to humans, nor did it originate with humans, and that is the lesson that needs to be learned, NOW. The principle of reflection is a "matter" of the world SEM. The sphere of "existence" of those nouminous (nomina->noumina) entities, which we called the Gods in a former age.

[24] In quotes since in conventional philosophy, the term ontology cannot even be applied to SEM.

[25] Korvin-Krasinski (1986: 12-13): Ich denke hier an den oft dilettantisch angewandten, verkürzten pseudoaristotelischen Dualismus. Er ist nur deswegen pseudoaristotelisch, weil der ursprüngliche Dualismus der Aristotelischen wie Thomistischen Akt- und Potenzlehre keineswegs die "vertikale" Vielschichtigkeit des Menschen wie der Schöpfung leugnet. Dualistisch ist allein jene aristotelisch-scholastische Akt- und Potenzlehre, wonach jede höhere Seinsstufe im Menschen wie in der Welt, beginnend vom höchsten Seinsakt und schließend mit der qualitätslosen Materie, sich wie ein Akt zu der auf ihn bezogenen Potenz der nächst folgenden niederen Seinsstufe oder Schicht verhält. Das konkrete Ganze dieses zwar bequem, aber salopp als leib-geistig bezeichneten menschlichen Kompositums ist jedoch keineswegs zwei-, sondern mehrteilig, je nach der Zahl der es zusammensetzenden materiellen, vegetativen, animalischen, psychischen und geistigen Seinsschichten.

[26] Gotthard Günther (1978: 124): Die Anerkennung des Du als ebenbürtige metaphysische Größe würde ein (mindestens) dreiwertiges Denken erfordern. Ein solches aber widersprach der mehrtausendjährigen Tradition. Es war nicht vollziehbar.

[27] It is presently an issue of great controversy over human rights between China and Western countries. In a culture which treats the individual as subordinate to the societal concerns, there simply is no such thing as "the rights of an individual in him/her-self".

[28] See also the works of Erich Fromm and Martin Buber. Marx has taken up this idea and fashioned it into his special version.

[29] Many anthropological accounts are available of hunter-gatherer peoples who spend only about 2-3 hours a day procuring life necessities. (Sahlins (1976: 20-34) "Stone Age Economy"). The other time they spend mostly socializing and gossiping. (E.O. Wilson 1978: 85). One other researcher describes the whole paleolithic life of humanity as a 1.500.000 year non-stop encounter group. It has to be remembered that in paleolithic times, with the thin spread of population, and the relative abundance of natural resources in the naturally fertile areas, there was quite a different standard of life than what is known from present-day hunter-gatherer societies that have over the millennia been driven into marginal and infertile areas by the more powerful agricultural societies.

[30] E.O. Wilson (1975), "Sociobiology", The Ants, and other works on social insects.