|
 H.B. Augustine is a junior undergraduate student at Denison University studying Philosophy and Communication. He has started a publishing organization called "Integral Publishing House" - contact him at august_h@denison.edu if interested in publishing Integral material. Integral Theology
The Logical Anatomization of God
Henry Augustine
A Crucial Ontological Truth and Fallacy
There are two main explanations for the Universe, and only two.
There are two main explanations for the Universe, and only two. The first is that God, or any Supernatural Being or Beings, created the World in a single Act. The Earth immediately followed, and all forms of life immediately appeared just as spontaneously. We will call this view the “mythic version.” The only alternative to the mythic version is that which pertains to what we may know as the Big Bang theory.
Disregarding the first view, we can agree that if everything follows from something else – if everything has a cause – then there must have been a first and single cause, i.e. the Big Bang, initiating all further effects/causes. We will call this view the “rational version.” These two ontological views are the only ones we can use to explain the World. There is no other way to explain the origin of everything.
In this essay, our mission is to venture deep enough within the confines of transrational or intuitive intellection (that Integral awareness, as we all may know, so readily allows) so that we can firmly grasp the significance of the Idea of God – so that we can further know and understand this Idea both inductively and deductively. Returning to the two main ontological views concerning the origin of the World, we can agree that because we are attempting to “prove” “God,” we need not consider the mythic version of Creation.
As we know, there are two main ways of interpreting the Big Bang or rational version. There is the “scientific interpretation,” and there is the “spiritual interpretation.” The scientific interpretation holds that the Big Bang was a meaningless random accident, and that everything that followed happened due to pure chance. The latter view does not necessitate what we will come to know and understand as God; however, the alternative does.
The spiritual interpretation sees that the Big Bang occurred but also that everything subsequent only happened in the way in which it did because of an Intelligent and Guiding Force. Newton referred to God or this Force as the “Clockmaker,” comparing the rationality and precision of the World to that of a mechanical clock, and naming the Force, responsible for designing this Clock and sustaining its Operation, a Label (semantically) synonymous to God. In this sense, the name “God” serves the same purpose as serves the name “gravity.” Gravity is that which is responsible for downward motion, planetary revolution, and the like, while God is that which is responsible for the nature and manifestation of the World.
Having considered these two interpretations of the rational version regarding ontology, let us proceed to see that the spiritual version is Absolutely True (and yet paradoxically partially) while the scientific one is literally quite the opposite. Consider the chances of the following happening randomly and accidentally.
- From nothing, a compact unit of sheer energy randomly explodes.
- This pure and undifferentiated energy randomly forms tiny particles, including atoms.
- The atoms randomly interact with one another, randomly proceed to bond, and randomly form all kinds of molecules.
- Likewise, stars and planets randomly emerge, while on planets, the molecules randomly form minerals, and cells.
- The cells randomly form plants, all kinds of plants.
- A new kind of cell randomly emerges, which randomly forms basic organisms – beginning with primitive aquatic life such as fish, and then land-based creatures called reptiles.
- The reptiles randomly become dinosaurs, and then another evolutionary schism randomly manifests – the emergence of mammals.
- Primates randomly appear, and from these creatures randomly come humans.
- In short, the Earth randomly begins as a fiery ball; it randomly hardens and water randomly emerges. Cellular life randomly follows, and from minuscule, single-cell entities comes the utter masterpiece that is the human being.
Let us reflect on this particular organism; it begins as the unity of a single sperm and egg. Nine months later, a fully developed baby is born. The baby grows and becomes intelligent.
The intelligent human is able to emanate profound and undying universal compassion and inspire a major world religion, split the atom and travel to the moon, write the Iliad and Odyssey and paint The School of Athens – and realize a timeless Truth in a transcendent state we label samadhi or “enlightenment.” The intelligent human comes from pure and undifferentiated energy that randomly exploded and randomly became atoms, which randomly became our Universe, in its entirety, in its unfathomable and unappreciable perfection, precision, coordination, and Absolute splendor. Whereas before we considered a chance, however infinitesimal it may be, that the scientific interpretation could suffice, now we will obey Reason and acknowledge that there is Absolutely no possibility, at all, that the scientific interpretation is right. Says scientific theorist Robin Collins in “Teleological Arguments for God's Existence”:
If the initial explosion of the big bang had differed in strength by as little as one part in 1060, the universe would have either quickly collapsed back on itself, or expanded too rapidly for stars to form. In either case, life would be impossible.
In agreement with Deepak Chopra, we can also consider the thoughts of one scientist:
The universe, after all, is not “energy soup”; it is not mere chaos. The incredibly exact fit of things in our world – above all, the astonishing existence of DNA – argues for an infinite amount of intelligence in nature. As one astrophysicist put it, the likelihood that life was created randomly is about the same as the likelihood that a hurricane could blow through a junkyard and create a Boeing 707.
There is so much Reason favoring the spiritual version of ontology, that it is far too easy to mistake it for sheer nonsense. A naïve judgment indeed. The way to make communication optimal in order for similar transrationality to be transferred from one mind to another is not through logic so much as it is through poetic, but nonetheless True, metaphor. So let us allow the analogies of experience or broader metaphors given above stand as the solid premise for our proof of the spiritual version of the World and thus God (God being the Essence of the spiritual version). Returning to the first explanation by Collins, we can see John Jefferson Davis elaborates that “an accuracy of one part in 1060 can be compared to firing a bullet at a one-inch target on the other side of the observable universe, twenty billion light years away, and hitting the target.”
Lastly, it is a subtle yet immensely significant Truth that it is both logically and physically impossible for something to come from nothing. The Universe – something – comes from “what was” before the Big Bang – nothing. Yet, the Universe was able to come from “nothing.” It Certainly violates the undeniable laws of both Reason and nature for something to come from nothing without the existence of that which can contradict, transcend, and precede both logical and physical necessity, thus eliminating “nothing” as being “literally nothing.” Disregarding the latter, however, we see that it is still (likewise) logically and physically impossible for the scientific interpretation not to be wrong. This matter is by no means one of opinion or of belief, as it is one of Certainty and of knowledge. It is an Absolute fact that the scientific interpretation is a completely and rather ridiculously delusional and pathological view that is no less dogmatic and superstitious than is the Creationist perspective claiming the Earth to be merely several thousand years old and humanity to have literally descended from Adam and Eve as literal individuals (etc.).
Unfortunately, there is no other way to articulate this Truth than in the way we have just done, just as there is no other way to articulate that the world orbits the Sun than to say that this notion is an obvious fact, that it simply agrees with Reason, that there is too much empirical evidence, and that it is clearly and distinctly – as Descartes would say – unquestionable. We agree that the spiritual version, hence, is necessarily right – since the two only other ontological explanations are (painfully) false. We know that the Universe is not an unexplainable and meaningless random accident. If the Universe is not unexplainable, meaningless, random, and accidental, then it must be explainable, meaningful, and intentional; in other words, “something” created it. However, it does not necessarily follow that God, the Immaterial Being, is this “thing.”
Perhaps an alien from some other dimension created the Universe. Though unlikely, perhaps the latter is True. Yet, how do we explain the material existence of the alien? Everything material must have a prior cause. In order for this creature to be capable of creating our Universe, it itself must have been caused by something of equal or greater holonic measure. Perhaps another alien is responsible for the first one and its respective World. However, again, the second alien still must have a prior material cause. Since otherwise this notion leads to an infinite regress, we can see that at one point, something must have caused the first material creator, pretending this actually is the case. No matter what, there must always be a Big Bang, and the Big Bang must come from nothingness, from Spirit, from Necessity-Omnipotence-Consciousness. However, Spirit and God are not exactly the same.
On God
God is Spirit, but Spirit is not God. What is God, then? God is the Form and Archetype of Spirit as Creator of the World, or Universe, or Creation. God is the Essential Manifestation of Necessity-Omnipotence-Consciousness, the Direct Cause of Creation – just as Necessity is the direct cause of Omnipotence and Omnipotence is the direct cause of Consciousness, just as Spirit is the Direct Cause of God. God is the Primordial Image or Archetype embodying Spirit's Intention to Create the World.
No definition of God exists that is entirely unambiguous and succinct. However, we should see God in relation to Spirit as an artist in relation to his or her artistic capability. The artist is able to produce a work of art, however magnificent, due to his or her potential or talent – but what directly determines the work itself is the volition, inclination, and deliberation of the artist. Likewise, Spirit is able to produce the World because of Spirit's Nature, but the World as it is directly reflects the embodiment of Will, Love, and Reason, the Objective Big Three. Let us briefly digress and make a distinction between the Subjective Big Three and the Objective Big Three.
The Subjective Big Three is the embodiment of those all too familiar Ideas Wilber has together coined simply the “Big Three.” The Big Three, in this sense, is the tripartite existence of Goodness, Truth, and Beauty, or the intersubjective, objective, and subjective modes of interpretation. These three are relative to the subject, and are thus subjective. On the other hand, the Objective Big Three together are relative to the object, and are thus objective. The Subjective Big Three, therefore, are what to which Goodness, Truth, and Beauty, beauty, truth, and goodness, or Goodness, Beauty, and Truth, each correspond: Will, Love, and Reason – together forming God. For the artist (still as a substantial metaphor of God) volition, inclination, and deliberation are the necessary and sufficient elements for there to be any kind of work.
The artist must be willing to paint or to sculpt (for instance). Furthermore, he or she must enjoy his or her work, both the process of making it and the art itself. Finally, in order to be successful at all, the artist must have an idea, regardless of when, of the painting or the sculpture. In other words, the artist must imagine the art, in addition to desiring it and choosing to create it. The artwork is not possible if one or more of these three qualities is lacking.
Perhaps the artist may know what he or she may like to create, and perhaps he or she feels strongly about doing so. However, the artist still must choose in order to begin. We can see the same necessity for the other qualities. The person can be willing and imaginative, but the work will not reflect quality, or attractiveness, or Beauty, if the artist does not enjoy the process of making it or value every aspect that it contains. Theoretically, volition and deliberation, or willingness and imagination, can produce the work, but if created entirely devoid of inclination or passion, then it will always be inferior to what would be the case otherwise. Finally, he or she can be willing to create the art and feel strongly for such, but there will be no work if there are no ideas guiding its construction.
Moving along, we can agree that volition is not inclination nor is it deliberation and the same applies for inclination and deliberation relative to their respective counterparts. In addition to the three being necessary and distinct, they are likewise sufficient. There is nothing aside from volition, inclination, and deliberation, or willingness, passion, and imagination, comprising that within the artist directly responsible for that which the artist creates. The artist must have ideas about what to create and must simultaneously desire to create something in the first place. However, deliberation and intention are insufficient because the artist must choose to act upon deliberation and intention. We can view God in the same lens.
In this analogy, “The artist is able to produce a work of art, however magnificent, due to his or her potential or talent – but what directly determines the work itself is the volition, inclination, and deliberation of the artist.” The artist is Existence. The artwork is the World, or Universe, or Creation (any name works). The artist's potential or talent is Omnipotence. Naturally, the artist's awareness is Consciousness. The artist's necessary possession or embodiment of volition, inclination, and deliberation – continuing with this analogy – together equal God. The artist cannot produce the art without the soul, subdivided, most primarily and indispensably, into “the part that decides,” “the part that feels,” and “the part that thinks.” (We may note that the second part of the latter statement does not necessarily precede or follow the third part, as they are interchangeable and it is only because of the order of the chakra system that Love precedes Reason in relation to the logical anatomization we have assigned to God.)
Likewise, Spirit cannot Produce the World without That Which Chooses, or Will; That Which Drives, or Love; and That Which Conceives, or Reason. The Primordial Image of the Being that is the Necessary, Omnipotent, Conscious, Voluntary, Omniscient, Omnibenevolent, and Omnipresent Facilitator, of all Creation – this Image, this Form, this Archetype, this a priori Perception, this Idea of this so-called, “God,” is One we Absolutely need to clarify sufficiently. Consider the following layout of God, thus far.
God:
Will-Love-Reason
“God” is simply a signpost, a symbol, an abstract representation of an Absolute. We have studied the current matter much more in terms of logic than in terms of science. We will now switch to understanding God more so in terms of the latter.
On God Further
The Universe, as we know, is not here by chance, at all. Rather, the Universe must be explainable, knowable, and understandable, in its entire infinite composure – thus, there is this Necessary, Omnipotent, and Conscious, Force, which is “behind everything.” The Universe is a Superintelligent Organism (not necessarily biologically speaking) that operates with flawless precision, growth, and splendor. The Cause of this precision, this growth, and this splendor, is this Force, no allusion to Star Wars necessary.
Speaking mystically, we may call the Force the Way, just as philosophically, we may call it the Unmoved Mover, and scientifically, Gaia. We must remember here that the common link between all these names is the neutral term “Force.” This tool allows us to make semantic/linguistic connections however more readily. Now, we should make note a subtle implication of what we have thus considered. The Force we use to refer to God in relation to our Universe clearly chose or decided to create a World with which to begin. In addition, the Force clearly made possible for quanta or energy to become atoms or matter to become planets such as Earth. Lastly, the Force clearly had a specific “Idea in Mind” in terms of the organization and structure of the World and our ability as humans to know and understand a relatively great deal of it. We can see that there must be these three attributes or characteristics of the Force, since there are empirical cues revealing what, understandably, these qualities in fact are, and why.
With all this considered, we can agree that in the above, we have identified a “volitional” characteristic, an “inclinational” characteristic, as well as a “deliberative” characteristic. We now face two questions. Are there any more seemingly distinct characteristics of the Force that we can add to the three that we are yet to examine thoroughly? Furthermore, when we have as many distinct characteristics as possible, do we know that they are, in fact, each distinct – or that some are really subcategories of others, and therefore it is unnecessary to include them in a most primary categorization or recognition? We will now pause and consider whether there are any more characteristics that we have not yet acknowledged.
We should see, having reflected sufficiently, that these three are the only characteristics that there are belonging to the Force. These characteristics are “volition,” “inclination,” and “deliberation.” We have already seen that these three together are different from one another. Furthermore, we have agreed that these three are all that exist concerning the Force, at least in our Universe. Now, firstly by examining volition, what concept or meaning do the terms decision, choice, action, and causation collectively represent or contain? Surely, each word shares in semantics a theme.
We can agree that the latter is True also for a number of words across many languages. Granted, some things may appear different for someone – based on a discrepancy in language, but not everything. We collectively are able to share the same understanding of the idea of mountain, or sky, or triangle, or green. The language is constructed and relative but the semantics, rather, are universal and Absolute. We may come to agree, then, that volition, decision, choice, action, and causation, together pertain to the Idea that is the essence of this first characteristic, which we have discovered concerning God or the Force. Let us now recognize and refer to this Idea as Will.
Just as we use “Force” as a neutral integrator of the various versions and names of “God,” we can adopt “Will” as the neutral integrator of the various labels we use for choice (etc.). Will is That Which Chooses. Will is the First Attribute of God, and it corresponds to the term how. We may now move to the Second Attribute of God or characteristic of the Force. We can best see the underlying essence or simply Idea, to which this characteristic pertains, as incentive.
God Chooses with Will to Create the World, using Reason. However, what compels God to make this Choice surely is not Will nor is it Reason. Only Love can induce God to Choose to Create the World, using Reason. People act only if they feel inclined or if they desire to do so. Likewise, God Decides only if God is Inclined or Desires to Decide. Put differently, Will and Reason are useless without that which would cause them to be useful. Will cannot cause itself to be useful, nor can Reason cause Will to be useful. Will is not motivation. Reason is not motivation. Motivation is unique unto itself.
If a person can do something, and if he or she knows what to do, then he or she still will not act. The person must also want to act, as God must Want or Desire to Create the World. God can Create the World and God Knows what to Create, but without the Desire to Make the Universe, the Universe would not exist. Just as God's Intelligence is best attributed to Reason, so is God's Desire best attributed to Love. Love is the word we have chosen to represent the essence of passion, just as Will is what we have chosen to represent the essence of choice. Love is the Second Attribute of God, corresponding to the term how. Finally, let us see why Reason is what represents the essence of conception relative to the Force.
Conception is the characteristic of the mind, conventionally defined, allowing us to be and to do what makes us human – to know and understand the World, continually and increasingly throughout time. Conception is similar to imagination in that both are “about” “something.” Conception conceives of “something” and so imagination imagines “something,” regardless what these somethings are. What have the somethings in common, most fundamentally? Perhaps we may come to realize that what conception and imagination necessarily share is content. Going further, what constitute the content are impressions, ideas, symbols, thoughts, and images.
Impressions are the physical memories that we have acquired from experience, which give us the ideas of the things that these qualities mentally represent. Ideas are the collective and unitary mental representations that multiple different words or phrases share from an identical standpoint semantically. These words or phrases can be and are spoken. A person's exposure to the collection of these words or phrases, or symbols – this collection being language – allows him or her to develop the ability to produce virtual sounds in his or her head, just as one can do the same for every other sense of which one has sufficient memory.
The ability to produce virtual sounds in one's head and to have a kind of inquisitive, dialectical conversation with them, this described faculty, brings us to the term concerning thought. The act of thinking is rearranging, however so, the ideas, by means of the mind's inner dialogue, in order to form different ideas and reach newer conclusions. Images – returning to imagination – are not attributed to impressions. Every coherent thought begins as a raw and undeveloped image. The image is the hypothesis, and the thought is the proof. The act of imagining is imagination, and the act of thinking is conception.
The purpose of this particular discussion is to familiarize ourselves with how we mentally deliberate, consciously or subconsciously, and what the significance of this is. We see that God or the Force must have a “Mind” or “Intelligence” of some sort, similar to that of ourselves. From a Certain point of view, God or the Force Has a specific Kosmic Structure “in Mind” behind the Universe in its entirety. St. Augustine, who “baptizes” Plato, provides perhaps the best explanation for the significance of this third characteristic of the Force.
Augustine combines Christian doctrine with Plato's theory of forms in order to explain the problem of universals. The problem of universals is one that has a number of views. The main schism concerning this predicament, however, is that between realism and nominalism. Realism sees that we recognize things and put them into various categories because they each inherently share a kind of “essence” or commonality. Nominalism, in contrast, states that we do not recognize things at all, and they do not share anything. Rather, all that anything has in common is the name that we devise and assign. Plato is a realist, as his work clearly marks. The theory of forms is an attempt to solve the problem of universals. In short, this problem questions how we are able to categorize things and call some “similar” and others “different.” Plato uses the following logic in order to justify his claims.
First, nothing that the senses tell us is the same, exactly as anything else is. Second, we clearly label things as being similar to one another – we categorize the World. How and why do we recognize (or create) similarity? What makes something fall under one category instead of falling under another? What makes one shade of “blue” similar to an entirely different shade of “blue?” What makes one “tree” similar to an entirely different one? If there are no physical things that are completely congruent, then what makes them similar to one another? What are the necessary, sufficient, defining characteristics of any nameable thing? When we perceive one of these things, are we able to see that it contains every single one of these traits?
Nevertheless, we need not spend hours contemplating whether the “human” we see is actually a “human.” We are able to recognize things, befitting some category, readily and confidently. If there is not one specific physical portrait of a human being to which everyone collectively refers, then what allows us to recognize things is more than being purely corporeal. Is there one shade of blue that is “bluest?” – or, alternatively, are all shades of blue equal physical manifestations of this primary color? If the second question is the case, then there are in fact more than physical attributes responsible for this notion of similarity.
Plato sees that what the shades of blue have in common is blue (obviously). However, this feature is not physical. Perhaps blue is better put, “blueness.” Blueness is not a thing – so what is it? If blueness is no-thing, if it is immaterial but still exists, then it is nothing other than an Idea, or Form. Every-thing corresponds to a respective Form. For as many naturally induced things, not necessarily speaking physically, as there are that we can know and understand there are equally as many Forms. The order and connection of ideas is the same as the order and connection of things. St. Augustine takes this predominantly philosophic notion and turns it into a theological one. In this sense, the Forms are the Ideas of God. He remarks:
…if these reasons of all things to be created and [already] created are contained in the divine mind, and [if] there cannot be anything in the divine mind that is not eternal and unchangeable, and [if] Plato calls these principal reasons of things “Ideas”, [then] not only are there Ideas but they are [also] true…
Aspects of the World are substantial manifestations, which derive from God, namely God's Ideas, or the Forms. The Universe as a whole is and has Form. The most general aspects of the Universe are Forms. The most general aspects of each of these aspects are Forms, and so forth. Earth is an Idea, and Earthness is a Form. Water is an Idea, and Waterness is a Form. Animal is an Idea, and Animalness is a Form. Human is an Idea, and Humanness is a Form. Plato calls the totality of the Forms the intelligible realm. In Augustine's view, the intelligible realm is the Mind of God as it relates to the nature of the World. Supreme Reason characterizes the Mind of God.
Having considered the Augustinian account on the problem of universals, we can refer to “Supreme Reason” as simply “Reason.” Reason is an Attribute of the World. The way in which the World is structured corresponds to Reason, or the Intelligence of God – God being Spirit as Creator of the World, not solely Spirit as the Embodiment of Necessity as it is, Omnipotence as it is, and Consciousness as it is – and just that. As a song is the auditory reflection of the musical talent of its respective artist, so is the World the expression of the Intelligence of God. Just as the artist paints something from an idea he or she previously had, or has, so does God Produce something pertaining to some Form. Reason, in this view, is synonymous to the Stoic Logos. Reason is the Third Attribute of God; it is responsible for the order of the Universe – the way in which the World is, the term what.
Conclusion
Will-Love-Reason together necessarily and sufficiently trichotomize God, or the Force. The label “God” implies there being a distinction between God and Spirit, or between the Force and nothingness. Let us now consider this apparent distinction. Spirit is Necessity-Omnipotence-Consciousness. Necessarily contained in Spirit are the Power to Create the World and the Ability to Acknowledge that the World exists. Spirit becomes the World, as we know that this is True. However, we have not yet necessarily described and explained the process.
Spirit as Necessity-Omnipotence-Consciousness needs Will-Love-Reason together in order to Create the World. The process does not go straight from Spirit to the World; there is something occurring between. Spirit as it uses Will-Love-Reason to Create the World, is the Abstract yet Legitimate Figure we have decided to call “God.” We have already clarified the nature of this intermediary realm, of God, existing between Spirit and the World or Universe. The necessary and sufficient logical and metaphysical sequence from Spirit or nothingness to God or the Force to the World or Universe is one that we have almost thoroughly come to know and understand. The remaining step, however, is to explain the World or Universe, to which we will more formally call Creation. We can see thus far in our logical experimentation that Spirit precedes God and Exists as Necessity-Omnipotence-Consciousness and God then follows from and is contingent on Spirit by this definition – Existing as Will-Love-Reason.
|
