Philosophical musings on Quanta & Qualia; Materialism & Spiritualism; Science & Religion; Pragmatism & Idealism, etc.
Post 89. July 4, 2019 continued . . .
Reality is Ideality
Ambiguity of Reality
A common complaint about the moral implications of Idealism is, “why would an all-powerful deity imagine an imperfect world like ours?” Kastrup suggests that, in a sense, we are the mind of G*D, so our reality is essentially G*D making-up his Mind. “The telos of life is to contemplate and understand ‘God’s thoughts from a perspective unavailable to ‘God’.” On the rare occasions when he uses the “G” word, he puts it in quotes, probably for the same reason I spell the designation of deity as “G*D” : to avoid the centuries of para-doxes, ambiguities & contradictions associated with the thou-sand names of gods. Humans are made in the image of the Enformer, not in the sense of our physical makeup, but of our essential form13 — formerly known as “spirit”. So whatever, or whoever, this abstract ultimate thinker is, we can’t assume it has the same feelings that our embodied souls enjoy or suffer16. Even though Plato’s Forms were defined as Perfect – eternal, infinite, un-changing – his real Things were imperfect, hence temporal, finite, evolving. Likewise, our emerging reality is immature : developing, bounded, & half-baked. Thus, perhaps the omnipotent Imagineer14 had in mind, not a finished product, but an experiential process. The end-state of this exercise in evolution may well be near-perfect though, as in the Omega Point15 conjecture. Kastrup didn’t go that far, but the mystery of incarnation — immortal deity taking the form of mortality — could be explained by the intent to experience things from a mortal moral perspective16.
In his last section, Kastrup reflects on the significance of an Ideal Reality. But first, he asks “does our current scientific understanding of reality truly corroborate this split between mind and world, inside and outside?” Secular Science and theistic Religion tend to believe opposing dualities : objective world vs subjective mind, or natural body vs supernatural soul. So, the dilemma of inward & outward perspectives hinges on the fact that our minds can conceive imaginary & emotive “realities” that are not perceived by others : e.g. schizophrenia, demons, drug trips, aliens, & Alters. Such non-physical experiences are believable from the First Person perspective, but are not subject to empirical evidence to satisfy second person skeptics. Hence, the author reminds us, “ our know-ledge of the world begins not with matter, but with perceptions. I know for sure that my pain exists, my “green” exists, and my “sweet” exists. I do not need proof of their existence, because these events are a part of me; everything else is a theory.” Which means that the voices of a schizo are real, and that objective reality is only a theory.
Beyond the clear implication of Idealism — that a universal entity must be experiencing how it feels to be real — Kastrup doesn’t have much to say about the nature or motives of that deity. Yet, the perennial debates about real vs ideal demand some explanation from the Realizer. Did G*D intend for He/r sentient creatures to be so confused about Your Reality vs Mine? What purpose might equivocation serve? Such a dubious predicament may be why atheists find the notion of an intelli-gent creator so absurd. It’s also why they insist on objective evidence to back-up any subjective faith. Logically, the inherent imperfection & duality of reality makes ambiguity unavoidable. But why create a conundrum, why engender an enigma? Because the uncertainty keeps things interesting???
End of Post 89
Paradox Ambiguity Contradiction and Statistical Reality
13. Human Essence : As walking talking phan-toms of Information – quan-tum field patterns – our physical existence is also ethereal. The Self/Soul is essentially a mental construct. http://blog-glossary. Self-Soul
14. Imagineer : A word borrowed from Disneyworld to describe engineers who are free to let their imaginations roam free to make fantasies become real. I use it to describe an omnipotent designer, who can create worlds out of pure imagination. It’s magic! Not real magic though, but ideal magic.
16. Last Laugh : If there is a heaven, or a mind-meld with G*D, maybe we will all look back on the trials & tribulations of life, and laugh. But maybe not. PanEnDeism is a sort of mind-meld of part & whole.
Monotheism viewed ideal perfect God as separated from the real imperfect world.
Pantheism viewed God as identical with the world, both mind & matter, including all its imperfections.
PanEnDeism (all-in-god) views G*D as BEING – the creative power to become anything. Thus G*D creates our world from He/r own substance (Information, EnForm-Action). Hence, G*D is the essential substance of the whole creation. So when a creature suffers, G*D feels the pain. This is loosely analogous to Jehovah sacrificing his own son (avatar) in a symbolic act of demonstrating solidarity with his afflicted people. In theory, if G*D is immanent in the world, then S/he experiences all of the joys & pleasures, and all of the pain & suffering. Perhaps that’s the point of an ideal immaterial BEING creating a real material universe : experience – direct empirical knowing as opposed to theoretical knowledge. For humans good & evil is a matter of Life or Death. For G*D, it-is-what-it-is : BEING.
NEXT
BACK
Forum
