Whatever drugs you're on Daniel, I want them. Without intention to flatter, I'll say that it seems like your thinking keeps getting sharper and more precise. This is close to a manifesto, a statement of core principles. If I was the benevolent dictator of the world, this piece would be required reading - with a test to follow.
Since I'm not, and as so often with your essays, I wish I could share this piece in its entirety with various friends and colleagues who I think would be equally impressed and whose thinking might even be influenced by the clarity of the piece. (And yes, of course, I know you need to pull in some income for your efforts by requiring paid subscriptions for full access.)
Hi Stephen, First of all, I think you get the full version of the piece in an email so why not share that? Second of all, thank you. I felt this was close to a manifesto in some sense... the start of something. Third of all, I will make the piece open to all tomorrow AM. Thanks!
Hi Daniel. Yes, I'm a paid subscriber. But at the end of the essay it says, "If you enjoy Daniel Pinchbeck’s Newsletter, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe."
I assumed that meant that friends can only read the full piece if they subscribe. I know a number of people who would really like this essay but who would be unlikely to subscribe. Am I mistaken about how that works?
Love what we are talking about together. Thanks. My issue is, the language needed to discuss in depth these concepts often leaves most people behind. This is kinda high minded egghead shit we are discussing here. Who amongst us can bring this into language an eight year old could understand. That’s when Sunday School lessons probably had there biggest impact on me. What is a simple. ‘A ha’ definition of monistic idealism for example. Who has lovely little fables explaining the way. This is what is needed to expand our reach
I asked Claude to rewrite the essay for a 16 year old and got this... would love to know what you think...
"What Is Reality Made Of?
Imagine you're building a house. You'd never start with the roof or windows - you'd begin with the foundation. The same goes for understanding our world and fixing its problems. We need to start with the most basic question: What is reality made of?
This question isn't just for philosophers sitting in ivory towers. Your answer to this shapes everything else: how you think about climate change, artificial intelligence, social justice, even what happens when we die. Let's break down the main ways people think about this:
The "It's All Physical Stuff" View
Most scientists and many modern people believe everything is made of physical matter - atoms, energy, and the forces between them. In this view, your consciousness (your thoughts, feelings, and sense of self) is just the result of brain chemistry. This way of thinking helped create our modern world - smartphones, vaccines, space travel. But it also has a dark side.
If everything is just meaningless physical stuff, why care about the long-term future of Earth? If death means total lights out forever, why not just focus on extending your own life through technology, even if it harms others? This thinking helped create our current crisis: amazing technological progress, but also environmental destruction and social alienation.
The Religious View
Some people take religious texts literally. For example, some Christians believe God made the world in six days and that the end times are coming soon. If you believe this, why worry about climate change or pollution? Some mix this with modern science in confusing ways - like tech billionaires who talk about both artificial intelligence and biblical prophecies.
A New (Old) Way of Thinking: Consciousness as Foundation
Here's where things get interesting. Recent discoveries in physics suggest something mind-bending: the universe might not have a definite reality until it's observed by consciousness. In 2022, scientists won the Nobel Prize for proving that the universe isn't "locally real" - meaning things don't have definite properties until they're measured or observed.
This leads to a view called "monistic idealism" - the idea that consciousness is the fundamental reality, and physical stuff comes from consciousness, not the other way around. Think about your dreams - in them, your mind creates entire worlds that feel completely real. What if our waking reality works similarly, but on a much bigger scale?
This isn't just some new age idea - it aligns with both cutting-edge physics and ancient wisdom traditions. It also solves some big problems in science, like the "hard problem of consciousness" (how does physical brain matter create subjective experience?).
Why This Matters For Your Future
If consciousness is fundamental, and we're all connected through it, this changes everything:
1. Environment: We'd see damaging nature as literally damaging ourselves, because we're all expressions of the same underlying consciousness.
2. Technology: Instead of racing to create artificial general intelligence or upload our brains to computers (which comes from the fear of death in the physical-only view), we might use technology more wisely, focusing on collective wellbeing.
3. Society: We might move away from extreme individualism and competition toward cooperation and mutual care. After all, if we're all connected at the deepest level, helping others is helping ourselves.
4. Personal Growth: Instead of seeing consciousness as just brain activity that ends at death, we might take seriously the possibility that some aspect of us continues. This could make us think more carefully about our actions and their long-term consequences.
Evidence and Implications
There's actually interesting scientific research about consciousness continuing after death. Dr. Ian Stevenson studied thousands of cases of young children who remembered details from past lives that could be verified. Physicist Amit Goswami has proposed ways this could work through quantum mechanics.
The Big Picture
Our current global problems - climate crisis, social division, mental health issues - might stem partly from our materialist worldview that sees everything as separate, meaningless physical stuff. If we shift to understanding reality as fundamentally conscious and interconnected, we might:
* Care more about long-term consequences
* Use technology more wisely
* Focus less on acquiring stuff and more on inner growth
* Work together better to solve global problems
* Take better care of nature and each other
Real Change Starts with Real Understanding
You can't solve problems without understanding their root causes. Many of our current attempts to fix global issues fail because they don't address our fundamental way of seeing reality. By understanding that consciousness might be primary and we're all connected through it, we might find better solutions to our biggest challenges.
This isn't just philosophy - it's about the future you'll inherit and help create. How we think about the nature of reality will shape how we handle artificial intelligence, climate change, social justice, and every other major challenge facing your generation."
I actually got new insights from reading the sixteen year old version. Thanks. Can it do an eight year old. When I was teaching myself marketing to further promote ecostore on our journey, I was always encouraged to use the simplest language I could manage. Less is more , is integral to my journey. E.g. I’m sorry for writing such a long letter, I didn’t have enough time for a short one . Mark Twain
I'm reminded of the saying "we need to dream a new dream." I was just reading about egregore's or thought forms that take on a life of their own from an individual or collective consciousness and it's the sanest explanation I've ever heard to explain entities of all kinds. Very much relates to this discussion.
Thank you for this - I am refreshed by your focus on the kinds of ideas that can lead us to the "Good, True, and Beautiful". One sentence did leave me scratching my head: "The 2022 Nobel Prize for Physics went to Alain Aspect, John Clauser, and Anton Zeilinger for experiments that overturned one of our most fundamental beliefs: the universe is not locally real." What exactly did they overturn? Can you clarify this?
Overall, I strongly resonate with what you are pointing out here. "The more deeply you consider it, the more it becomes obvious." Yes, so true. I have long been baffled as to why it isn't more obvious to more people. Although I was raised by atheistic, humanist parents, this has been an obvious truth for me my whole adult life. Probably the recreational LSD trips I took in college have played a significant role in freeing me from the materialist illusion.
But as you point out, the problem is that materialism acts as a kind of religion in the minds of materialists who pride themselves as being enlightened, educated, scientific, free of religion. It's ironic that they can't see this about themselves. My father, a very ethical man overall, was quite blind in this respect, though I am happy to assert that he was neither selfish nor greedy.
But consciousness has a flame-like quality, and can effect what is around it the way one flame ignites another. You are actively engaged in igniting flames. Materialism is like a candle snuffer, but I like to believe that the light is growing stronger in human consciousness (outer evidence often seems to contradict this) and that the candle-snuffer of materialism won't ultimately prevail.
In 1959, a Russian dissident named Daniel Adreev wrote a book based upon a vision he had while in prison about a future time when all religions would be peacefully united under one central understanding which he called "The Rose of the World". The book, published long after his death, bears the same title. From the publisher's blurb: "It offers a prophetic call for the spiritual reunification of all people and an open and harmonious relationship among the great world religions. For Daniel Andreev, The Rose of the World is a spiritual flower whose roots are in heaven; each petal is a unique image of the great world religions and cultures, and the whole flower is their joint co-creation with God."
Of course if you set the example of theism as fundamentalist Christianity then the only two options are idealism or pantheism, but that is a strawman of theism.
I feel we should fully have the conversation about theism etc at some point. Do you want to share your current perspective on it or suggest some resources?
As you probably know, I tend toward Rudolf Steiner's esoteric Christianity: I sense/feel/think that Steiner was correct that Christ was an incarnation from the higher worlds to show us the path toward individuation... the necessity of fully entering into individual self-consciousness and breaking with the tribal / communal past. For Steiner, the "I" is the "fourth body" after the physical, etheric, and astral. This is the "fourth world" incarnation and the period in which we start to develop the "I". Next we develop the "spirit self" which is the astral body transformed by the I: That is the fifth incarnation. After that, we transform the etheric body, then the physical body becomes under the complete command of the I. From there, we reach subtler levels.
It is funny: Thiel believes "liberal humanism" is the antichrist: The idea of social services, government support is somehow evil, as it makes people weak and dependent I guess? I feel the transhumanist movement is a cruel Ahrimanic/Luciferic deviation (Satanic) that Steiner also predicted. I would love to debate him on this topic, in case you are buddies.
Daniel , one of our biggest misguided myths is, Heaven is place you go to when you die.
You really don't need to die first in order to get to the Heavenly Sphere, you most certainly can go through the steps you lay out, by becoming your "spirit self" in this lifetime. I've been on the astral plane, we all do have an Alaska record. Its all there for one to attain if one desires.
The thing is up until now these things weren't desired as much. As you say, we all have been sold certain goods of thinking about it all.
We are coming to the end of the line and it's becoming very obvious there is a whole lot to this story then we know. 99% of our thinking is backed by beliefs in things. Within the real world within the Spiritual world there aren't any Beliefs, just wisdom and knowledge through our own experience.
as I am an Anthroposophist who has done all the work. The heavy lifting, there is a place called "on high" a much higher sense of ourselves exists.
Ha, definitely not buddies with Thiel! I hardly even know of him, and mostly hearing of him through you. I can understand his point that liberal humanism has something to do with Antichrist, as I see humanism coming from Christianity but ditching Christ and the Cross, so it appears to be like Christ but is a deception. I think a mixture of transhumanism and the liberal humanist ideology will be involved in the Antichrist/Ahriman incarnation. Something like an embodied AGI simulation of Christ that will be able to perform miracles/magic and try to bring about global unity, fooling even true believers that he is the Christ, but will be a serpentine deception.
Anyways, I can't give a lengthy case for theism here, but I will say that due to the relational structure of reality, the necessity of relationality for love, as well as the many intellectual arguments for God: the cosmological argument, the contingency argument, the argument of moral objectivity, the teleological or design arguments, the aesthetic argument, etc, I find theism very convincing and just makes sense intuitively. But most of all the argument from my own experience that the stance ones takes during embodied prayer to and worship of God is the 'right' stance to take, as felt in the heart. The testimony of the Saints is also very inspiring.
But if we are to talk about theism we should not be using fundamentalist protestant Christians as our example, we should at least be using the example of the historically original and most unchanged church, the Orthodox Church. Here are a few sources:
The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church- Vladimir Lossky
JR I also think it's important to say each tradition, practice brings one to a different location within the Spheres above us , Buddhist don't believe in a God. However Buddhist practice can lead to higher awareness of oneself, whereas , with Steiner within the Christ one can travel well into the Heavenly Sphere and meet the archangels.
Steiner is a great guide as are so many others whom have attained this enlighten state
This was brilliantly done. Not incidentally, I was thinking about a lot of this kind of stuff in yoga just now, which sort of corroborates my main (only?!) source of functioning optimism: we HAVE to go through this shit in order to get there. The proof is that we WEREN'T GETTING THERE (or even having such discussions, at least not this robustly and in so many places) before. So — it does feel like the pressures to evolve are real, and that without those pressures, we wouldn't evolve. I suppose this is just a restating of the Developmental approach, but it does feel true. And having a framework that can contain it all is essential, which you've so powerfully offered here.
My life and work right now has brought me into contact with a lot of new things, which have sort of scrambled but also opened my mind to asking questions that challenge what I thought I knew. This is scary and disorienting, but also essential. Have you seen, by any chance, Century of the Self (documentary by Adam Curtis)? That's not an example of what I'm working on, but it's such a great "lift the hood" exploration of our path to this moment. In general, it's really thorny to be super super committed to the structures of our democracy — in active ways — but also ask such questions.
As I just texted my friend just now: "The political discourse is at a complete stalemate because we do not have a mechanism to ask deeper questions. That's the party I want to found. Every single issue that happens you'll have 50% of the people being for an anti without any nuance. That has to stop. People have to do all of this discussing through the lens of personal interrogation and spiritual inquiry or will get nowhere; it's just volleyball." At this point, I feel like we can plop any "event" into the discourse and we'll pretty much know what everyone is going to say about it. Very few actual, non-rhetorical questions as far as I can tell.
I love where you're going with the development of this framework - we desperately need a container to hold it all. Thank you so much for your important work.
Beautiful. I am thinking of another great mind who refutes materialism, Bernardo Kastrup (Why Materialism is Baloney). I don’t understand why some of the high IQ architects of the Trumpolcalypse don’t consider the wisdom of Indian and Tibetan yogis who developed such powerful empirical technologies to explore consciousness and death over thousands of years. Once you begin non-dual meditative practices you quickly realize the primacy of consciousness. Thanks for using the example of dreams to illustrate the point. The truth is right under our noses, so to speak
"When enough of us realize we are not atomized individuals but differentiated expressions of a unified field of consciousness that dreams us into existence (as part of its “divine play”), we will choose to live differently. We will reorganize our society according to principles of interdependence, reciprocity, or “ubuntu.” "
This is visionary, Daniel! Idealism or the All-Consciousness model of reality, will gain wider acceptance as we FEEL AND KNOW this worldview, not just as a pretty idea.
Speaking of stories, I always come back to one image that helps me frame my way of being in the world: the plant in Wall-e. As long as there’s one good thing left in this world, we can build on that.
This is beautiful, Daniel. When I first started using psychedelics in my early 20s, one of the initial grand realizations I felt was that we (humanity as well as what we perceive as the physical world) are all aspects of a great cosmic mind. I have been searching for a way to incorporate that into my basically rational worldview ever since. Reading this re-ignited that idea for me. I am all for monistic idealism. Thanks for your efforts.
It’s a beautiful thesis and feels true to me on some intuitive level. I have my doubts about the speed with which such a paradigm shift can be effected in people at large, which poses a serious concern given the urgency of the polycrisis.
Very good, Daniel. I find myself in agreement with everything -- which is rare today!
My own Weltanschauung is pretty much the Vedanta; not very original, but rare in a world where reductive materialism still holds, for want of a better vision.
Questions regarding the ontology and metaphysics of idealism:
What is the purpose of human life in idealism?
Is love possible only as an illusion?
Does idealism have a metaphysics of realism or nominalism?
Will be looking forward to hearing about how "idealism gives us logical reasons to live decent, compassionate lives and to fight courageously, even sacrifice ourselves, for what we believe to be true, good, and beautiful."
Whatever drugs you're on Daniel, I want them. Without intention to flatter, I'll say that it seems like your thinking keeps getting sharper and more precise. This is close to a manifesto, a statement of core principles. If I was the benevolent dictator of the world, this piece would be required reading - with a test to follow.
Since I'm not, and as so often with your essays, I wish I could share this piece in its entirety with various friends and colleagues who I think would be equally impressed and whose thinking might even be influenced by the clarity of the piece. (And yes, of course, I know you need to pull in some income for your efforts by requiring paid subscriptions for full access.)
Hi Stephen, First of all, I think you get the full version of the piece in an email so why not share that? Second of all, thank you. I felt this was close to a manifesto in some sense... the start of something. Third of all, I will make the piece open to all tomorrow AM. Thanks!
Hi Daniel. Yes, I'm a paid subscriber. But at the end of the essay it says, "If you enjoy Daniel Pinchbeck’s Newsletter, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe."
I assumed that meant that friends can only read the full piece if they subscribe. I know a number of people who would really like this essay but who would be unlikely to subscribe. Am I mistaken about how that works?
only drug right now is caffeine
Love what we are talking about together. Thanks. My issue is, the language needed to discuss in depth these concepts often leaves most people behind. This is kinda high minded egghead shit we are discussing here. Who amongst us can bring this into language an eight year old could understand. That’s when Sunday School lessons probably had there biggest impact on me. What is a simple. ‘A ha’ definition of monistic idealism for example. Who has lovely little fables explaining the way. This is what is needed to expand our reach
I asked Claude to rewrite the essay for a 16 year old and got this... would love to know what you think...
"What Is Reality Made Of?
Imagine you're building a house. You'd never start with the roof or windows - you'd begin with the foundation. The same goes for understanding our world and fixing its problems. We need to start with the most basic question: What is reality made of?
This question isn't just for philosophers sitting in ivory towers. Your answer to this shapes everything else: how you think about climate change, artificial intelligence, social justice, even what happens when we die. Let's break down the main ways people think about this:
The "It's All Physical Stuff" View
Most scientists and many modern people believe everything is made of physical matter - atoms, energy, and the forces between them. In this view, your consciousness (your thoughts, feelings, and sense of self) is just the result of brain chemistry. This way of thinking helped create our modern world - smartphones, vaccines, space travel. But it also has a dark side.
If everything is just meaningless physical stuff, why care about the long-term future of Earth? If death means total lights out forever, why not just focus on extending your own life through technology, even if it harms others? This thinking helped create our current crisis: amazing technological progress, but also environmental destruction and social alienation.
The Religious View
Some people take religious texts literally. For example, some Christians believe God made the world in six days and that the end times are coming soon. If you believe this, why worry about climate change or pollution? Some mix this with modern science in confusing ways - like tech billionaires who talk about both artificial intelligence and biblical prophecies.
A New (Old) Way of Thinking: Consciousness as Foundation
Here's where things get interesting. Recent discoveries in physics suggest something mind-bending: the universe might not have a definite reality until it's observed by consciousness. In 2022, scientists won the Nobel Prize for proving that the universe isn't "locally real" - meaning things don't have definite properties until they're measured or observed.
This leads to a view called "monistic idealism" - the idea that consciousness is the fundamental reality, and physical stuff comes from consciousness, not the other way around. Think about your dreams - in them, your mind creates entire worlds that feel completely real. What if our waking reality works similarly, but on a much bigger scale?
This isn't just some new age idea - it aligns with both cutting-edge physics and ancient wisdom traditions. It also solves some big problems in science, like the "hard problem of consciousness" (how does physical brain matter create subjective experience?).
Why This Matters For Your Future
If consciousness is fundamental, and we're all connected through it, this changes everything:
1. Environment: We'd see damaging nature as literally damaging ourselves, because we're all expressions of the same underlying consciousness.
2. Technology: Instead of racing to create artificial general intelligence or upload our brains to computers (which comes from the fear of death in the physical-only view), we might use technology more wisely, focusing on collective wellbeing.
3. Society: We might move away from extreme individualism and competition toward cooperation and mutual care. After all, if we're all connected at the deepest level, helping others is helping ourselves.
4. Personal Growth: Instead of seeing consciousness as just brain activity that ends at death, we might take seriously the possibility that some aspect of us continues. This could make us think more carefully about our actions and their long-term consequences.
Evidence and Implications
There's actually interesting scientific research about consciousness continuing after death. Dr. Ian Stevenson studied thousands of cases of young children who remembered details from past lives that could be verified. Physicist Amit Goswami has proposed ways this could work through quantum mechanics.
The Big Picture
Our current global problems - climate crisis, social division, mental health issues - might stem partly from our materialist worldview that sees everything as separate, meaningless physical stuff. If we shift to understanding reality as fundamentally conscious and interconnected, we might:
* Care more about long-term consequences
* Use technology more wisely
* Focus less on acquiring stuff and more on inner growth
* Work together better to solve global problems
* Take better care of nature and each other
Real Change Starts with Real Understanding
You can't solve problems without understanding their root causes. Many of our current attempts to fix global issues fail because they don't address our fundamental way of seeing reality. By understanding that consciousness might be primary and we're all connected through it, we might find better solutions to our biggest challenges.
This isn't just philosophy - it's about the future you'll inherit and help create. How we think about the nature of reality will shape how we handle artificial intelligence, climate change, social justice, and every other major challenge facing your generation."
I actually got new insights from reading the sixteen year old version. Thanks. Can it do an eight year old. When I was teaching myself marketing to further promote ecostore on our journey, I was always encouraged to use the simplest language I could manage. Less is more , is integral to my journey. E.g. I’m sorry for writing such a long letter, I didn’t have enough time for a short one . Mark Twain
I totally agree and you have given me an idea.
Just sent it to many friends. It’s saying…..media no longer available??
such a great question and well put.
I'm reminded of the saying "we need to dream a new dream." I was just reading about egregore's or thought forms that take on a life of their own from an individual or collective consciousness and it's the sanest explanation I've ever heard to explain entities of all kinds. Very much relates to this discussion.
yes I was just discussing egregores in a comment to Jamie Wheal's new piece on Epstein and occultism! One of my favorite topics!
I'll take a look, for sure. Thank you!
Thank you for this - I am refreshed by your focus on the kinds of ideas that can lead us to the "Good, True, and Beautiful". One sentence did leave me scratching my head: "The 2022 Nobel Prize for Physics went to Alain Aspect, John Clauser, and Anton Zeilinger for experiments that overturned one of our most fundamental beliefs: the universe is not locally real." What exactly did they overturn? Can you clarify this?
Overall, I strongly resonate with what you are pointing out here. "The more deeply you consider it, the more it becomes obvious." Yes, so true. I have long been baffled as to why it isn't more obvious to more people. Although I was raised by atheistic, humanist parents, this has been an obvious truth for me my whole adult life. Probably the recreational LSD trips I took in college have played a significant role in freeing me from the materialist illusion.
But as you point out, the problem is that materialism acts as a kind of religion in the minds of materialists who pride themselves as being enlightened, educated, scientific, free of religion. It's ironic that they can't see this about themselves. My father, a very ethical man overall, was quite blind in this respect, though I am happy to assert that he was neither selfish nor greedy.
But consciousness has a flame-like quality, and can effect what is around it the way one flame ignites another. You are actively engaged in igniting flames. Materialism is like a candle snuffer, but I like to believe that the light is growing stronger in human consciousness (outer evidence often seems to contradict this) and that the candle-snuffer of materialism won't ultimately prevail.
In 1959, a Russian dissident named Daniel Adreev wrote a book based upon a vision he had while in prison about a future time when all religions would be peacefully united under one central understanding which he called "The Rose of the World". The book, published long after his death, bears the same title. From the publisher's blurb: "It offers a prophetic call for the spiritual reunification of all people and an open and harmonious relationship among the great world religions. For Daniel Andreev, The Rose of the World is a spiritual flower whose roots are in heaven; each petal is a unique image of the great world religions and cultures, and the whole flower is their joint co-creation with God."
that's so beautiful. I love the image of the flower.
Of course if you set the example of theism as fundamentalist Christianity then the only two options are idealism or pantheism, but that is a strawman of theism.
I feel we should fully have the conversation about theism etc at some point. Do you want to share your current perspective on it or suggest some resources?
As you probably know, I tend toward Rudolf Steiner's esoteric Christianity: I sense/feel/think that Steiner was correct that Christ was an incarnation from the higher worlds to show us the path toward individuation... the necessity of fully entering into individual self-consciousness and breaking with the tribal / communal past. For Steiner, the "I" is the "fourth body" after the physical, etheric, and astral. This is the "fourth world" incarnation and the period in which we start to develop the "I". Next we develop the "spirit self" which is the astral body transformed by the I: That is the fifth incarnation. After that, we transform the etheric body, then the physical body becomes under the complete command of the I. From there, we reach subtler levels.
It is funny: Thiel believes "liberal humanism" is the antichrist: The idea of social services, government support is somehow evil, as it makes people weak and dependent I guess? I feel the transhumanist movement is a cruel Ahrimanic/Luciferic deviation (Satanic) that Steiner also predicted. I would love to debate him on this topic, in case you are buddies.
Daniel , one of our biggest misguided myths is, Heaven is place you go to when you die.
You really don't need to die first in order to get to the Heavenly Sphere, you most certainly can go through the steps you lay out, by becoming your "spirit self" in this lifetime. I've been on the astral plane, we all do have an Alaska record. Its all there for one to attain if one desires.
The thing is up until now these things weren't desired as much. As you say, we all have been sold certain goods of thinking about it all.
We are coming to the end of the line and it's becoming very obvious there is a whole lot to this story then we know. 99% of our thinking is backed by beliefs in things. Within the real world within the Spiritual world there aren't any Beliefs, just wisdom and knowledge through our own experience.
as I am an Anthroposophist who has done all the work. The heavy lifting, there is a place called "on high" a much higher sense of ourselves exists.
*Akaskic Record , I'm severely dyslexic...
Ha, definitely not buddies with Thiel! I hardly even know of him, and mostly hearing of him through you. I can understand his point that liberal humanism has something to do with Antichrist, as I see humanism coming from Christianity but ditching Christ and the Cross, so it appears to be like Christ but is a deception. I think a mixture of transhumanism and the liberal humanist ideology will be involved in the Antichrist/Ahriman incarnation. Something like an embodied AGI simulation of Christ that will be able to perform miracles/magic and try to bring about global unity, fooling even true believers that he is the Christ, but will be a serpentine deception.
Anyways, I can't give a lengthy case for theism here, but I will say that due to the relational structure of reality, the necessity of relationality for love, as well as the many intellectual arguments for God: the cosmological argument, the contingency argument, the argument of moral objectivity, the teleological or design arguments, the aesthetic argument, etc, I find theism very convincing and just makes sense intuitively. But most of all the argument from my own experience that the stance ones takes during embodied prayer to and worship of God is the 'right' stance to take, as felt in the heart. The testimony of the Saints is also very inspiring.
But if we are to talk about theism we should not be using fundamentalist protestant Christians as our example, we should at least be using the example of the historically original and most unchanged church, the Orthodox Church. Here are a few sources:
The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church- Vladimir Lossky
The Mountain of Silence, by Kyriakos Markides
JR I also think it's important to say each tradition, practice brings one to a different location within the Spheres above us , Buddhist don't believe in a God. However Buddhist practice can lead to higher awareness of oneself, whereas , with Steiner within the Christ one can travel well into the Heavenly Sphere and meet the archangels.
Steiner is a great guide as are so many others whom have attained this enlighten state
I don’t find that important to say but be my guest
Daniel go and tell all your friends you've met the man who can see through all of our veils...
This was brilliantly done. Not incidentally, I was thinking about a lot of this kind of stuff in yoga just now, which sort of corroborates my main (only?!) source of functioning optimism: we HAVE to go through this shit in order to get there. The proof is that we WEREN'T GETTING THERE (or even having such discussions, at least not this robustly and in so many places) before. So — it does feel like the pressures to evolve are real, and that without those pressures, we wouldn't evolve. I suppose this is just a restating of the Developmental approach, but it does feel true. And having a framework that can contain it all is essential, which you've so powerfully offered here.
My life and work right now has brought me into contact with a lot of new things, which have sort of scrambled but also opened my mind to asking questions that challenge what I thought I knew. This is scary and disorienting, but also essential. Have you seen, by any chance, Century of the Self (documentary by Adam Curtis)? That's not an example of what I'm working on, but it's such a great "lift the hood" exploration of our path to this moment. In general, it's really thorny to be super super committed to the structures of our democracy — in active ways — but also ask such questions.
As I just texted my friend just now: "The political discourse is at a complete stalemate because we do not have a mechanism to ask deeper questions. That's the party I want to found. Every single issue that happens you'll have 50% of the people being for an anti without any nuance. That has to stop. People have to do all of this discussing through the lens of personal interrogation and spiritual inquiry or will get nowhere; it's just volleyball." At this point, I feel like we can plop any "event" into the discourse and we'll pretty much know what everyone is going to say about it. Very few actual, non-rhetorical questions as far as I can tell.
I love where you're going with the development of this framework - we desperately need a container to hold it all. Thank you so much for your important work.
Beautiful. I am thinking of another great mind who refutes materialism, Bernardo Kastrup (Why Materialism is Baloney). I don’t understand why some of the high IQ architects of the Trumpolcalypse don’t consider the wisdom of Indian and Tibetan yogis who developed such powerful empirical technologies to explore consciousness and death over thousands of years. Once you begin non-dual meditative practices you quickly realize the primacy of consciousness. Thanks for using the example of dreams to illustrate the point. The truth is right under our noses, so to speak
"When enough of us realize we are not atomized individuals but differentiated expressions of a unified field of consciousness that dreams us into existence (as part of its “divine play”), we will choose to live differently. We will reorganize our society according to principles of interdependence, reciprocity, or “ubuntu.” "
This is visionary, Daniel! Idealism or the All-Consciousness model of reality, will gain wider acceptance as we FEEL AND KNOW this worldview, not just as a pretty idea.
Speaking of stories, I always come back to one image that helps me frame my way of being in the world: the plant in Wall-e. As long as there’s one good thing left in this world, we can build on that.
This is beautiful, Daniel. When I first started using psychedelics in my early 20s, one of the initial grand realizations I felt was that we (humanity as well as what we perceive as the physical world) are all aspects of a great cosmic mind. I have been searching for a way to incorporate that into my basically rational worldview ever since. Reading this re-ignited that idea for me. I am all for monistic idealism. Thanks for your efforts.
It’s a beautiful thesis and feels true to me on some intuitive level. I have my doubts about the speed with which such a paradigm shift can be effected in people at large, which poses a serious concern given the urgency of the polycrisis.
Very good, Daniel. I find myself in agreement with everything -- which is rare today!
My own Weltanschauung is pretty much the Vedanta; not very original, but rare in a world where reductive materialism still holds, for want of a better vision.
Questions regarding the ontology and metaphysics of idealism:
What is the purpose of human life in idealism?
Is love possible only as an illusion?
Does idealism have a metaphysics of realism or nominalism?
Will be looking forward to hearing about how "idealism gives us logical reasons to live decent, compassionate lives and to fight courageously, even sacrifice ourselves, for what we believe to be true, good, and beautiful."
Have you heard of Samkya philosophy ?Talk about a detailed roadmap of ontology ! it's not only a philosophy but a method of recovering fundamental truths and clarity. https://www.wasatchayurvedaandyoga.com/sankhya-philosophy/