So this is what I do in a boring period in AP English and AP Economics and Credit Recovery, write extremely rambling explanations of my theories on philosophy.
I think that defining one’s philosophy ought to be somewhat systematic. While my system may not work for everyone, this is what I consider the simplest and most efficient way to get at your true beliefs. First must come observation and speculation. You must observe the way reality works and the truths inherent in it, and speculate on what is non-observable. If the two are separate they are useless, they must complement each other as one process. Next comes contemplation, piecing observations and speculations together, and finding what truths you believe to be evident in the world of creation and the superb, or whether you even find those to be evident. Next comes finding labels, which are used to explain your beliefs, labels cannot define your beliefs, but can allow you to consider them in a more systematic way. I think the three categories of your personal philosophy that need labeling are your philosophic method, your cosmology, and your ethic. With these you have a largely complete world view that you can compare to others. This can be called a MCE, and I will use that acronym for the rest of the post.
For me, my MCE is that of a Rationalistic <a href=”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism”>Panentheistic Humanist. As with everyone, there may be multiple names for each category that your philosophy falls under, or none. For me mine falls well into pre-established labels.
Rationalism means that I believe that the created world works under certain logical laws and that conclusions about it must follow from observation and logical laws. This is largely true for the superb as well. I do not however believe that our logic is the highest form; I do not think this means that rational struggles are useless, just hard.
Panentheism means I believe God is transcendent over creation, yet is also the summary of creation. Some people may use this to meant that God exists in creation and outside of it. I personally do not believe that God exists as such, but that he transcends. Panpsychism, Monism, Holism and Idealism also apply, but in lesser ways. Panentheism is not the same as Pantheismwhich holds that creation and God are synonymous. I am a big fan of Platonic Universals and Forms.
My ethic is Humanism. I view the indomitable spirit of man as largely synonymous with God, though God transcends it. I believe that that which creates the highest human equilibrium is the most moral, and that the most moral actions are those that allow the largest amount of men to realize the largest amount of their human potential.
From this MCE you can draw greater conclusions. I personally, upon examination of science and world philosophical traditions am drawn to accept the claims of Bahá’u’lláh, founder of the Bahá’í Faith. For this reason I identify as a Bahá’í. As a Bahá’í I view the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh as in agreement with my MCE in every way, and adding to it. For each person these conclusions can be different, perhaps political, perhaps religious, perhaps personal.
This is the rationalization I use to define my Panentheism and Humanism. The rationalism may need a further definition, but I am glad to let its use be its own justification for use. These are statements I view to be self-evident, but mutually justifying.
- YOU MAY NEED TO USE THE ARROW KEYS TO VIEW THE WHOLE SENTENCES.
- THERE IS NO WORDWRAP.
- THERE IS A SCROLLBAR AT THE BOTTOM.
- God is an ultimate concept.
- Ultimate concepts cannot have the dichotomy of cause/effect applied to them. They deny causality.
- Existence is an effect necessarily preceded by a cause.
- Anything which exists has a cause.
- God does not exist.
- (Creation = Nature. Noun, not verb.)
- Creation is a relative concept.
- Existence is a relative concept.
- Relative concepts are those proceeded necessarily by a cause.
- This implies that the relative, or existent, did at one time not exist.
- Time is existent.
- Creation at one time did not exist.
- Creation has a cause.
- Creation is a relative concept.
- Creation exists.
- God does not exist.
- Creation exists.
- Transcendence and existence are mutually exclusive.
- God transcends.
- Creation exists.
- (God = ultimate cause. Nonentity)
- Transcendence is independent of cause.
- Transcendence necessarily proceeds existence.
- A cause encompasses all attributes of the effect.
- God is transcendent and causeless.
- Transcendence must be ultimate/unified.
- God is ultimately transcendent and causeless.
- Creation is relative and caused.
- God causes nature.
- A relative concept cannot produce another equally relative concept.
- Each production is more relative.
- New productions must become increasingly relative.
- Entropy.
- A transcendent can cause any relative.
- God is capable, and must constantly create the incapable, or dependent. (Nature)
- Causing/Capable
- Increasing. Capable of continuity.
- Entropic/Incapable
- Decreasing. Dependent.
- God
- -Ultimate
- -Transcendent
- -Causeless
- -Causing/Capable
- -Precedent
- -Encompassing/Sufficing
- Creation
- -Relative
- -Existent
- -Caused
- -Entropic
- -Following
- -Reflective
- //===============
- ===============//
- Man’s nature is good.
- Good is that which seeks the highest possible equilibrium.
- Disruption must proceed a heightening of equilibrium.
- Evil is nonexistent.
- Evil, the concept, is latent good.
- What is evil in higher equilibriums may be good in lesser equilibriums.
- Latent good is realized by actively seeking an ever heightening equilibrium.
- Ultimate equilibrium is impossible by entropic beings.
- Potential for good must be infinite.
- Latent good is infinite.
- Evil is infinite.
- Latency and stagnation is contrary to the purpose of man.
- Good is the existent expression of transcendent divine attributes, or platonic universals.
- Man realizes greater good through the seeking of an ever heightening equilibrium
- Greater good lies latent as evil.
- Man contains infinite potential good.
- Man cannot be perfected.
- Man can be improved.
- God is the source of existence.
- Evil is a comprehension of a nonexistence, an intellectual construct.
- God is the source of comprehension, an attribute of God.
- The nonexistent requires and cannot have a source.
- God is not the source of evil.
- God intends man to express His attributes.
- Man expresses His attributes via realization of latent good.
- Serving humanity allows higher equilibrium to follow.
- Serving man is synonymous to serving God.
One of my personal theories aligns with the Bahá’í principle of progressive revelation. I think that the evolution of man is very gradual but also dependent upon a few large leaps; this is also the way that modern science is finding that biological evolution works. (God is the unified field theory people, figure it out!) Man reaches stagnancy when seeking equilibrium. Stagnancy is contrary to the purpose of man. In a stagnant state the great latent good in man is not becoming realized, though what already has been realized remains. However, while before the stagnancy began this was enough good for man to function, at some point man needs to advance or the build up of evil over time has negative effect. At this point society has become so wrapped up in stagnancy that it is impossible to advance any further, or break free of the hold. Monolithic figures, aberrations must occur, single men who can raise society just enough to reach equilibrium again, so that again an ever advancing society can continue. The greatest of these are divinely guided, as their aberrations are beyond what can naturally occur.
Here and now, boys 