A meta-axiom is an axiom *about* an axiom, of course. It is like an
axiom of set theory where set theory is the *basis* for arithmetic,
or geometry, or the sorting of fruit.

However, this is *not* (as I keep pointing out) a work on
mathematics or even logic per se, it is a work on the axiomatic basis of
philosophical knowledge to help us dig our way *out* of the Pit of
Existential Despair that we find ourselves in as we realize that we know
*nothing* certainly, beyond all doubt.

Nothing, that is, but the instantaneous fact of our awareness.

However, *Hume himself* (as the Father of this sort of empirical
skepticism) was the first one to admit that nobody can live in a state
of perpetual doubt. Being a solipsist may be *logically unassaible*
but that doesn't mean that it isn't *stupid* all the same, as has
been demonstrated both in Eastern Koan and by Johnson's fist thumping on
the table^{14.1}.

So do not expect to find in this chapter anything like an argument that
the meta-axioms presented below are *inevitable truth*. They are
not. They are merely wisdom. Wisdom is itself a possibly loaded term,
so let me be specific. Wisdom in the sense that if you think about it,
*anything* that you choose to believe is chosen on some sort of
grounds. What are those grounds? They are basically a kind of
intuition, one that is (accepting things at face value, seeing the world
just as it is, accepting without question the flow of space and time
that our watcher within sees through the differential process of sensory
input and memory) doubtless linked in all sorts of ways to the way we
evolved (as creatures that don't accept this without question tend not
to survive for very long), to the very *experience* of
self-awareness in what appears to be a body that needs to be fed, and
cared for, and that can experience great pleasure or horrible pain.

Wisdom, not knowledge, is what at least some of the *Eastern*
religious philosophies are all about, specifically Zen. Only in a state
of great personal clarity and self-awareness is it possible to use your
intuition to judge axiom sets fairly and see if they ``work'' for the
world that you see (at that time) most clearly.

The following are a partial list of the meta-axioms *I* would
suggest that you use in your daily lives to guide your choice of prime
axioms and your judgement of the axioms of others. None of them are
really knowledge, few of them involve anything like logic. Some of them
are almost as anti-logical as they can get! However, for all of that,
maybe there is just a hint of self-evident truth about them. Or, if you
prefer, self-consistency. I'm hoping that they merely state to you in
clear terms that which, when you think about it, you already ``know''
without knowing or caring how or why you know it.

I urge you to give these meta-axioms a try; start to use them as the
basis of questioning your own personal beliefs and axioms. This process
may prove so uncomfortable you blind your inner eye and return to a
state of absolute adherence to one of the old sets (likely the one you
were raised with). Or you may find it exhilarating and liberating -
for the first time you may find yourself actually *understanding*
your own beliefs; why you believe what you believe, what the *consequences* of your beliefs are.

You may find, for the very first time ever, that *consistency* of
your belief set becomes important to you, rather than practicing the
sort of spiritual schizophrenia experienced by many Christians, Moslems,
and Jews, for example, when trying to reconcile ``irrefutable''
scientific evidence that the Universe is 13 billion years old or
thereabouts and that we all evolved on this planet over roughly a
billion years with, say, Genesis as supposely unquestionable truth.

Let us therefore begin with perhaps the most important meta-axiom - one this whole article has been working towards:

- The Axiom of Open-Mindedness
- Shaving the Barber with the Razor of Ockham
- The Esthetic Principle
- The Axiom of Romance
- The Axiom of Deity