Take peace, for example. Just as an example. There's something about it when you see it. Something that you could never quite put your finger on. It's not really clear what it is.
Go ahead. Try to define it. Whether you do so from a flat materialistic point of view, or whether you do so from a mechanistic animist point of view, if you are honest, you will run into conceptual difficulties, and your definition will be easy to dismantle. But yet, despite all that, there's something about it, isn't there? Is it an emergent property of human thought, and therefore an emergent property of life and therefore an emergent property of matter? If so, can it then be said to be an ultimate property of the universe prior to and beyond human conceptualizing of it? If it's then an ultimate property of the universe, what is it?
The atheists might declare its realness to be something of an illusion because it is derivative from lower levels of reality. But that doesn't work because there's no reference point for realness. It seems to exist in its own right. The animists might declare it to be a spirit, but that's an analysis that surrenders itself to labels. What does "spirit" mean?
Moreover, piety towards qualities of the universe--piety as in formal or ritualized acts of awe, reverence, and gratitude toward the aspects of the universe that you value and cherish--is a response that seems to match the human psyche very well. It makes for a psychologically balanced life.
This is the most honest approach to reality that I can come up with. I don't feel that this is related to any choices I've made. It's how things actually are, as best as I can tell. I don't feel a fool for being haunted by the nature of reality; I ought to be.
I also really don't mind if I fit into a religious label or not. Fitting into other people's religious labels should never be my goal. What I think is honestly real should come first; categorization should always come second.
No comments:
Post a Comment