Those are great questions. I've wrestled with these epistemological ones in other writings, linked below, but the nature of truth, meaning, or consciousness is one of the most profound issues we can raise, I think. So these aren't the kinds of questions we should try to answer in a short article. There's always more to say on them. (The last link is to an older article of mine, from my pre-Medium blog, but I think it's one of my better presentations of the aesthetic view of reality.)

Writing a lot is consistent with the humbling, "cosmicist" view of nature (of the outer wilderness), I think, because the latter promotes an aesthetic view of all events. If everything from concepts to worldviews and theories are generalizations that simplify and idealize, in some sense they're all fictive (entertaining or distracting falsehoods, part of what Eastern mystics call "Maya"). That means a transhuman or an enlightened being would likely regard the universe as little more than a giant, self-producing, and self-annihilating art gallery. By writing a lot I'm discharging the natural, metaphysical obligation to generate more art (made of ideas and symbols).

But there's the old philosophical paradox of antirealism's self-refutation. If everything were just art, wouldn't that very statement be just another falsifying artwork? Couldn't we therefore ignore it like we can any art object we don't like, and gravitate towards some other, more attractive model? Nietzsche called that perspectivism. But I argue against relativism. I don't think the choice between models or worldviews is arbitrary or endless (although see my article on the possible endlessness of explanation, linked below). There are objective facts to account for, especially those uncovered by science, although I take a pragmatic-realistic view of science.

Some lies are truer than others, and some fictions are more or less useful for different purposes (that's the pragmatism). Philosophical and religious fictions/models ground all the others we use. Spiders spin webs and humans spin tall tales in our process of "understanding" the world.

I'm not familiar with Percival, but I see from his Wiki page that he was an esoteric thinker. I'm interested in Jung via Gnosticism, but I'd be inclined to naturalize his view of the archetypes. I'd also think of Jung's psychology along Kantian lines.

https://medium.com/grim-tidings/what-happens-after-philosophy-eats-its-tail-a9421b7c1f9b?sk=8e0dada2542fa50988d825ac236b536b

https://medium.com/interfaith-now/beyond-the-fast-food-conception-of-ultimate-knowledge-227d8d43ad0f?sk=d29bd4319b9f775b4e67a28c104c6b31

https://medium.com/the-apeiron-blog/what-is-the-nature-of-ultimate-knowledge-664642cf8147?sk=73f128be23b11ea1e09a8c3e83db51ed

https://medium.com/grim-tidings/is-the-search-for-truth-a-game-7e72fb11f4e1?sk=325eeea9180d8967bd04a9ab663d5f7c

https://medium.com/the-apeiron-blog/atheism-and-the-endlessness-of-explanation-22e72f89d509?source=friends_link&sk=cdc78c5a20c7678da120f27b2fbd897b

https://medium.com/the-philosophers-stone/transhuman-epistemology-knowledge-in-the-greater-scheme-78d68bdc6704?sk=e47050735c56aeda7ec12647bbc090b3

https://medium.com/the-philosophers-stone/the-promethean-revolt-and-the-cosmic-meaning-of-art-a43dd213ee91?sk=c53c9da512ed22b88d192242ba44070c

https://medium.com/grim-tidings/the-inherent-value-of-a-godless-universe-980314a44fd8?sk=48b94f7149c68a39653ffa52e533e973

http://rantswithintheundeadgod.blogspot.ca/2013/11/life-as-art-morality-and-natures.html