Bidspirit auction | DICK PHILIP K.: (1928-1982) American

DICK PHILIP K.: (1928-1982) American Writer of Science Fiction, considered a master of - DICK PHILIP K.: (1928-1982) American Writer of Science Fiction, considered a master of dystopian fiction. A lengthy, interesting T.L.S., love, Phil (with a love heart and arrow drawn in his hand alongside his signature), three pages (separate leaves), 4to, n.p. (Santa Ana, California), 13th January 1981, to Professor Patricia Warrick. Dick commences his letter announcing that he is 'Elated at finding what seems to be an explanation for my March 1974 experience I have been reflecting on the subject of monism (in view of the fact that my explanation is that I saw a monistic world such as Spinoza describes, as I discuss in my two previous letters). Now what I've been pondering is: What value, if any, would the thought of the first great monist in philosophical history have for me; that is, Parmenides? I always sensed that Parmenides' thought was crucial in explaining March 1974 but I could not apply it. I mention Parmenides in VALIS, as you know, and my 'Two-Source Cosmology' is based on his metaphysics' and continues to explain 'In my recent letters I mention what I call the macrometasomakosmos, but I do not explain it, since I was copying from my notes. This is my neologism for a changeless morphologically-arranged world that I saw; it seemed to be conceptual (hence morphologically-arranged); the world we normally see, which I call the flux world, as Heraclitus called it, feeds into this macrometasomakosmos new accretions that cause what I call the phylogons (which are the eide or Forms within this eternal structure or kosmos) to reticulate and arborize, as in a memory system that is being perfected, made more complex and completed. I could not figure out for years where this macrometasomakosmos is; then very recently I realized that it is our world but seen correctly; that is, in terms of four spatial axes rather than three spatial axes plus time; in other words, time is converted into the fourth spatial axis (as I keep saying in VALIS, 'Here time turns into space'). So I regard this permanent macrometasomakosmos not as a separate world from our own-as Plato's Form world is from the flux world-but as this world correctly seen, so instead of having two worlds as with Plato I have one world: I) Seen incorrectly as continually passing out of existence, which is our flux world. II) Seen correctly as eternal, with new accretions constantly added to it, but conceptually arranged; that is, the macrometasomakosmos is not static; it grows and perfects and completes itself, but it is permanent. The phylogons are permanent. This realm is a marvelous structure and is obviously the kosmos that Pythagoras envisioned (he used the term 'kosmos' in a very unusual way; it is worth researching his meaning; basically he used the term to mean 'the harmonious fitting-together of the beautiful' and he believed that the kosmos is alive). I am now of the opinion that to see our world correctly as the macrometasomakosmos is to see a monistic world. Although I got the idea from Spinoza I at once turned to Parmenides; he believed that the world-order truly (correctly) seen was a monistic world in which there was no change; he opposed this to the flux world that our percept system reports. (I know you know all this, but I am laying out the basis here for my own conclusions, so forgive me.) Now, Parmenides explained the problem this way: the world-order is made up of a dialectical interaction between Form One and Form Two, which resemble respectively Yang and Yin of Taoism. However, as I mention in VALIS, Parmenides believed that Form Two was only seeing; it just seemed to exist; men believed wrongly that it existed. So what he called the 'dry soul' which had no Form two in it could apprehend the world under the aspect of Form One alone) based on the premise of like-to-like; what you are subjectively is what you will experience externally, a rather sophisticated doctrine for such an early period in history). Dick returns to his experiences of March 1974, Now, I have talked for years about what I call a 'second signal' that I saw added to the reality that we normally see; this, I mean, in March 1974. Something that is normally missing-but which exists; it is missing only in that we do not perceive it-got perceived by me. In my two previous letters I conclude that this 'second signal' is the other attribute of natura sive substantia………But, when I reflect on Parmenides, I wonder if it is not possible that I saw this other attribute of substantia -the sole element that constitutes reality-because I was able to filter out Parmenides' Form Two. I did see the macrometasomakosmos and it did fit Parmenides' description of the unchanging eternal monistic world (which frankly never occurred to me before!). Now,