The Nature of Reality; and why I became a Friend

Most of my life, I have been of the Friend-Quaker lifestance.

In the past, in 1967, during my conscientious objector service in a Pennsylvania hospital for emotionally disturbed teens, I regularly attended BackBench young adult meeting in Philadelphia. Later in California, I (and my sweetheart) became members of California Yearly Meeting and later I was a member of Pacific Yearly Meeting.

One of the main reasons I was drawn to Friends-Quakers in 1967, beside commitment to peacemaking, is because of Expectant meeting. In those open open, transcendent meetings, I experienced the Immanence of the Light--the Good, the True, the Just, the Caring.

Besides that day-to-day Friends lifestance, what view of Reality of billions of humans is closest to the truth?
I am not a philosopher, just a rather average guy who reads a lot of books on cosmology, philosophy, and biology and advocates for human rights.

Here's a brief description of the Process view of Reality which I think is true and try to live up to:

#1 All reality is coming about by the everlasting but limited cosmic reality that is becoming. Essential reality is Process influencing matter and energy. This is the view of brilliant thinkers such as philosopher and mathematician Alfred North Whitehead.

This cosmic but limited ultimate/transcendent reality--God, the Light--who is far beyond human understanding works toward changing matter and energy and conscious, creative life such as homo sapiens into increasing patterns and forms of beauty, meaning, and purpose. This is also the view of some liberal Jews.

But where is the evidence for this?
Process thinkers explain that consciousness, reason, ethics, mathematics, natural law, creativity, aesthetics, life itself, etc. are the evidence.

We are living in a universe about 27 billion light-years across, and about 13 billion years old and, according to cosmologists, the cosmos will last more billions of years.

This view aligns well with liberal Quakerism, but most of the technical philosophical explanations are BEYOND my understanding. I'm a relatively average teacher and former mental health worker (who got born with a "why" in his throat;-).

But to function, we need to take a stand somewhere in order to live and create.

However if my speculative understanding is incorrect, what are other--many far more popular--views of Reality exist?

#2 All reality came about by cosmic chance. Seemingly the view of the French biologist Jacques Monod in Chance and Necessity, a powerful book I read a few years back, and the view of the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould.

My take on this as an average person: I think this view is possible. I guess given cosmic time even the "laws" of nature, math, reason, life, ethics, consciousness could all blip into existence.

#3 All reality came about by a cosmic determinism of meaningless matter and energy which is eternal. Everything is lock step. There are no choices, not for what I supposedly ruminate on having for lunch or whether or not to commit murder or what to choose for my career.

Based on our studying this at university, and for many years since, and many times trying to imagine my "I" as an illusion who is only 'done to' by the cosmos, I think this is one of the least likely views of reality. But the view is very popular these days--sort of an atheistic version of Creedal Christianity.

#4 All reality came about somehow by a temporary, finite, imperfect, even distorted, expression of the perfect eternal Ideal Forms of Platonism.

#5 All reality came about by emergent possibilities in a quantum singularity vacuum or some unknown ultimate reality. But where did the quantum singularity vacuum come from? Here goes "turtles all the way down."
This view seems to posit an eternal physical reality with no "super" reality 'transcending' it.
Humankind is a "fluke," an "accident," a "lucky" break.

#6 All reality came about by an impersonal ultimate reality of cosmic beauty. Scientists such as Albert Einstein stated this was his view, that he thought the impersonal god of Spinoza was true. But this seems similar to a combination of #3 and #4.

The emergent-possibility cosmos isn't meaningless and purposeless, but filled with meaning.
Interesting, but I doubt it.

#7 All reality came about as just one of an infinite number of universes of an infinite multi-verse, the view of some modern cosmologists. What is the ultimate of the multi-verse is unknown or maybe the multiverse itself is ultimate.

Intriguing, but seems too speculative for me. However, I'm not as skeptical as Martin Gardner, one of the co-founders of the modern skeptical movement who wrote a scathing dismissal of this view.

#8 All reality came about by the impersonal Brahma God of Hinduism and some modern New Age leaders such as Ken Wilber with his Integral Theory, and Deepak Chopra, etc.

The impersonal Ultimate, Brahma is conducting a cosmic dance in which it forgets its self and dreams into billions of separated forms including in one minor edge of the universes, thinking humans.

But all is illusion. And all events both good and evil are produced by Brahman. That is why Ken Wilber and other such leaders claim that Brahman caused 9//11, causes all murders, all rapes, etc.

Given that I am a human rights worker from way back, for about 55 years, obviously this isn't my cup of philosophical tea. Also, I still vividly remember as a Gandhi devotee being shocked when a Hindu priest in L.A. tried to persuade me to go to Vietnam to kill (when I was drafted), saying insects are killed all the time in reality.:-(

#9 All reality came about by unknowable factors. Everything beyond and before the Big Bang is such a complete unfathomable mystery that it will probably not ever be solved by finite humans at least not for a very long time.

Allegedly the view of the Mysterians such as the skeptic Martin Gardner, Roger Penrose, etc.

#10 All reality continually comes about by infinite impersonal reality which never had a beginning. No creator god exists. Some forms of Buddhism are atheistic and nihilistic, though other forms are theistic.

--

What do you think?


In the Light,

Dan Wilcox

Side Bio Note: My career for many years was as World and American literature and writing teacher after I dropped out of seminary and quit being a youth minister. However, I've also worked driving a caterpillar on a kibbutz farm in Palestine-Israel, driven a chrome truck, and been an assistant manager of a backpacking-camping store.

What Is the Essential Nature of Reality? Many Leaders Claim to “Know.”

How do so many human leaders "know" the essential nature of reality?

Exactly how and why such human hubris exists among most Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and Atheists is uncertain.

I’m not going to try and unravel that conundrum in one blog post.

Rather I am going to describe the most common alleged claims for us seekers to take a careful look, study, and then make a tentative, educated guess about.
Here goes; hold on to your virtual hats;-):

Living in a universe about 27 billion light-years across, and about 13 billion years old and, according to cosmologists, a cosmos that will last more billions of years, that is the huge existence which we humans in cosmic time 'blipped into'. And there is a real possibility that this cosmos is only one of an infinite number in an alleged multiverse--
that is educated speculation by many prominent human thinkers, scientists, and philosophers.

What is "essential or inherent reality"?

#1 All reality came about by cosmic chance. Seemingly the view of the French biologist Jacques Monod in Chance and Necessity, a powerful book I read a few years back, and the view of the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould.
The human species came about by “luck.”

My take on this as an average person: I think this view is possible. I guess given cosmic time even the "laws" of nature, math, reason, life, ethics, consciousness could all blip into existence eventually.

#2 All reality came about by a cosmic determinism of meaningless matter and energy which is eternal. Everything is lock step. There are no choices, not even about what to have for lunch or whether or not to commit murder or what to choose for my career.

Indeed, every molecule, everything, every event, every human action was petrified to happen at the moment of the Big Bang. Consciousness, reason, etc. are all illusions. According to the scientist Sam Harris, even our sense of “I” is an illusion. And even if existence happened again a “trillion” times, everything would happen exactly the same.

So the Germans will gas millions in the Holocaust eternally, never able to choose a different action:-(
Despite my studying this determinism at university, and for many years since, and so many times trying to imagine my "I" as an illusion who is only 'done to' by the cosmos, I still think this is one of the least likely views of reality.

But the view is very popular these days--sort of an atheistic version of Calvinism.

#3 All reality came about somehow by a temporary, finite, imperfect, even distorted, expression of the perfect eternal Ideal Forms of Platonism.
But why did this happen? Where did evil come from?

#4 All reality came about by emergent possibilities in a quantum singularity vacuum or some unknown ultimate reality. But how did the quantum singularity vacuum originate? Here goes "turtles all the way down."

This view seems to posit an eternal matter and energy reality with no meaning 'transcending' it.
Like in #1, life, consciousness, humankind, reason, ethics are all "flukes," "accidents," "lucky" breaks.

#5 All reality came about by an impersonal ultimate reality of cosmic beauty. Scientists such as Albert Einstein stated this was his view, that he thought the cosmos was meaningful, but impersonal. This view seems similar to a combination of #3 and #4.

However, unlike #2 and #4, the emergent-possibility cosmos isn't meaningless and purposeless, but is filled with intellectual meaning.
Interesting, but I doubt it.

#6 All reality is coming about by the everlasting but limited cosmic reality that is becoming. This is the view of thinkers including philosopher and mathematician Alfred Lord Whitehead, process philosopher Charles Hartshorne, etc.

This cosmic but limited God who is far beyond human understanding works toward changing matter and energy and conscious life such as homo sapiens into increasing patterns and forms of beauty, meaning, and purpose. This is also the view of some Reform Jews.

But where is the evidence for this?

Process thinkers explain that consciousness, reason, ethics, mathematics, natural law, creativity, aesthetics, life itself, etc. are evidence, the hints that this isn’t a “meaningless” cosmos.

This view is appealing, but most of the technical philosophical explanations are BEYOND me. I'm still trying to understand the science tome, The Elegant Universe by the cosmologist Brian Greene.

I'm a relatively average literature teacher (who got born with a "why" in his throat;-)

#7 All reality came about as just one of an infinite number of universes of an infinite multi-verse, the view of some modern cosmologists. What is the ultimate of the multi-verse is unknown or maybe the multiverse itself is ultimate. And, besides, while finite humans can seek to understand, the actual nature of reality is probably forever beyond finite mental abilities.

Intriguing, but seems too speculative for me. However, I'm not as skeptical as Martin Gardner, one of the co-founders of the modern skeptical movement who wrote a scathing dismissal of this view.

#8 All reality came about by the impersonal Brahma God of Hinduism and modern New Age
(such as Ken Wilber with his Integral Theory, and Deepak Chopra, etc. ).

The impersonal God Brahma is conducting a cosmic dance in which IT forgets its self and dreams into billions of separated forms including in one minor edge of the universes, illusionary thinking humans.

But all is illusion. And all events both good and evil are produced by Brahman. That is why Ken Wilber and other such leaders claim that Brahman caused 9//11, causes all murders, all rapes, etc.

Not significantly different from Christian, Muslim, and Atheist determinists who use very different terms but come to, basically, the same results.

Given that I am a human rights worker, ethicist, and educator from way back, for about 55 years, obviously this isn't my cup of philosophical tea.

Also, I still vividly remember as a Gandhi devotee in the 60’s being shocked when a Hindu priest in L.A. tried to persuade me to go to Vietnam to kill (when I was drafted), saying insects are killed all the time in reality.:-( Or as I learned later that Gandhi claimed, that all humans are “playthings” of the gods.

#9 All reality came about by unknowable factors. Everything beyond and before the Big Bang is such a complete unfathomable mystery that it will probably not ever be solved by finite humans at least not for a very long time.

Allegedly, this is the view of the Mysterians such as the modern skeptic Martin Gardner and Roger Penrose, the English physicist, mathematician, and philosopher, etc.

#10 All reality continually comes about by infinite impersonal reality which never had a beginning. No creator god exists. Some forms of Buddhism hold this view (though other forms of Buddhism are theistic).
--

At this point in my life, I lean toward some view of #3 and #6, though I am open to #1 as a real possibility.

And furthermore realize, as I already said, that maybe we finite humans don't have enough knowledge to even decide this question.
But we need to operate from some worldview, engage in life as it happens, hold to some form of ethics.
So.

In the Light,
Daniel Wilcox

Part #4: What's the Light got to do with UR and us?

SUBPOINT D: INHERENT WORTH

Every single human being is of inherent worth, and is an end, not a means.

This is very clearly a HOPE statement.

It comes from the philosophy of the Enlightenment and from radical groups such as the Friends, whose modern affirmation has been—“There is that of God in everyone.”

However, there is no way for scientists to show, let alone prove, that every single human is of “inherent worth.”

And, strangely, very often of late, plenty of leading thinkers, both non-religious and religious, are going out of their way to emphasize that homo sapiens don't really have any "inherent worth," at all.

They state that such a phrase is merely "woo," "superstitious," and "stupid."

Instead, these modern thinkers emphasize that on the contrary, humans are only minor specks in existence, only twigs in evolution, and but "bags of chemicals, and are one insignificant, purposeless result of natural selection, etc.

And so many Christian leaders at present are emphasizing that human beings have no value, are “worthless,” and that humans exist only as a means, exist only to give the Christian God glory, etc.

With all of these dismal statements...

What is a human to do?

What to think with so many, in so many ways, ‘counting the ways’ that humans have no value, except what we assign ourselves with our own subjective preferences.

There is hope, light in this philosophical darkness.

Consider the views of the philosopher Immanuel Kant, social and political activist Thomas Paine, and many others. They all emphasized human “inherent worth" and that has been the position in all forms of theistic humanism ever since.

First, this phrase means that humans are MORE than genetically and evolutionarily of the primate class of animals in biology.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary: primate--“3 [New Latin Primates, from Latin, plural of primat-, primas]
: any of an order (Primates) of mammals that are characterized especially by advanced development of binocular vision, specialization of the appendages for grasping, and enlargement of the cerebral hemispheres and that include humans, apes, monkeys, and related forms (as lemurs and tarsiers)”

Full Definition of mammal
Mammal—“any of a class (Mammalia) of warm-blooded higher vertebrates (as placentals, marsupials, or monotremes) that nourish their young with milk secreted by mammary glands, have the skin usually more or less covered with hair, and include humans”

Notice there is no mention of "meaning," "purpose," or essence.

In the science of biology, homo sapiens is only one branch of many on a long complicated bush of Life.

But we humans aspire to live beyond the instinctive, survival level of life. We are life aware, life able to reason, life able to create, life able to seek meaning and purpose and beauty.


Enlightenment leaders and others such as the Friends and Unitarian-Universalists think that humans have so much
more importance, are of great inherent worth, equal, and with unalienable rights!

First, let us take a look at the Quaker statement--"that of God in every person."

The phrase has been widely used in the twentieth century as an expression which signifies the central truth of the Quaker message--that every human, including oppressive enemies have essential meaning and worth beyond their merely physical biological origination.

This phrase is a modern take-off, re-interpretation of 17th century leader George Fox's spiritual statements such as, "This is the true light which doth enlighten every man that cometh into the world..." Works, IV, page 252.

"Three days before he died he wrote to Quaker ministers in America to 'Let your light shine among the Indians, the Blacks, and the Whites, that you may answer the truth in them, and bring them to the standard and ensign, that God hath set up, Christ Jesus'" Journal,II page 502

"The light which everyone that cometh into the world is enlightened with is not conscience, for the light was before anything was made....So the light is that which exerciseth the conscience toward God, and toward man, where it is loved and the voice heard.'"

"George Fox used this phrase, or variants of it, hundreds of times."
Lewis Benson
from Quaker Religious Thought, Vol. XII, No. 2, Spring 1970;
retyped for electronic distribution by Simon Watson
http://www.qhpress.org/essays/togiem.html

The LIGHT is a hope-trust-ratopnal concept that Ultimate Reality is transcendent “beyond” all matter and energy,
and that this essential reality
extends itself into the cosmos through reason, logic, math, ethics, and aesthetics as well as other ways.

It is also the source of the regularities of the universe, sometimes popularly called, natural law.
(The latter is what some famous scientists have spoken of as the “intellectual beauty of existence,”
and why they refuse to agree with the naysayers who claim that reality is “meaningless” and "purposeless.")

Take a look at how Immanuel Kant explained this--

from James Rachels, Kantian Theory: The Idea of Human Dignity
"The great German philosopher Immanuel Kant thought that human beings...
have “an intrinsic worth, i.e., dignity,”
which makes them
valuable’ “above all price.”

"According to Kant, in his Lecture on Ethics (1779)
humans may never be “used” as means to an end. He even went
so far as to suggest that this is the ultimate law of morality."

"Like many other philosophers, Kant believed that morality can be summed up in
one ultimate principle from which all our duties and obligations are derived.

He called this principle The Categorical Imperative."

"In the Groundwork of the
Metaphysics of Morals (1785) he expressed it like this:
Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it
should become a universal law."

"However, Kant also gave another formulation of The Categorical Imperative.
Later in the same book, he said that the ultimate moral principle
may be understood as saying:
Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another,
always as an end and never as a means only."
Kantian Theory:
The Idea of Human Dignity
James Rachels
From James Rachels, The Elements of Moral Philosophy,
pp. 114-17,122-23. Copyright
1986 by Random House, Inc.
--

This focus on rational theistic-humanism has been carried on by various other groups including some Unitarian-Universalists.

Their 1st Principle is:
"The Inherent Worth and Dignity of Every Person"

“Reverence and respect for human nature is at the core of Unitarian Universalist (UU) faith. We believe that all the dimensions of our being carry the potential to do good."

"We celebrate the gifts of being human: our intelligence and capacity for observation and reason, our senses and ability to appreciate beauty, our creativity, our feelings and emotions."

"We cherish our bodies as well as our souls. We can use our gifts to offer love, to work for justice, to heal injury, to create pleasure for ourselves and others."

“‘Just to be is a blessing. Just to live is holy,’ the great twentieth-century Rabbi Abraham Heschel wrote."

"Unitarian Universalists affirm the inherent worth and dignity of each person as a given of faith—an unshakeable conviction calling us to self-respect and respect for others.,”
Rev. Dr. Rebecca Ann Parker, minister, theologian, and author
from The Unitarian Universalist Pocket Guide, available from inSpirit: The UU Book and Gift Shop

In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox