|
|||||
| Home | Article 4 of . Free Will |
List of Articles |
| < previous | Section 9 |
End . States . of . Mind
The links in the table on the left take you to sub-headings in this article.
Sub-headings |
Objective and Subjective Sources of Reality The theory of reality that I embrace is called philosophical Idealism. This is the view that matter does not exist in its own right, that in fact it is a product of mind. All objects are mental creations. In this view, since the whole world is the sum of all objects, then even the world is a mental construction. If the world is just an idea, what produces it ? . The mind of god. This is the only view of reality that makes sense to me. [¹] |
| Nihilism and oblivion | |
| Existence before essence | |
| Primary motivation | |
| Will or mind | |
| Cosmic evolution | |
| References |
The world of objects is just a world of ideas in the universal mind (or objective mind) of god. How does this world of ideas arise ? . Where do sensory stimuli originate from ?
I view reality in this way : god creates a sensory system in tandem with the creation of an external world. The sensory system consists of radiators (things which either originate or reflect light) and receptors. God projects the image (which are the ideas), using light radiation, and then the individual’s senses (which are receptors) convey it to the ego’s mind. This view allows for the interpretation of the individual’s experience and existence. The external world is reflected in the individual’s mind like an object in a mirror ; the individual then interprets it. This view, when simplified by removing the concept of god, becomes the view of mainstream science.
The standard issue in the traditional exposition of philosophical Idealism is whether any external world exists apart from the impressions that are produced in the person’s mind. Do these impressions have similarities to an external world of objects ? . My answer is yes, since the reality of determinism proves to me that I cannot control some aspects of my mind. I do not have complete free will. Therefore this weakness must be due to external influences.
The images in a person’s mind do correspond with the actuality of external objects, allowing for subjective distortions due to personal preferences, imagination, expectancy, etc. The objective mind of god produces the external world of mental objects. A dialogue between objective mind and the individual’s subjective mind is the only framework that makes sense of my experience of life. This particular version of philosophical Idealism is called objective Idealism.
When god is left out or side-lined in theory, then the version of philosophical Idealism that we have is called subjective Idealism. This view centres on the activity of the soul, as it gradually unfolds consciousness for the ego to explore.
Objective Idealism has a much larger scenario. I place it within the twin centres of the immanent god and the transcendent god. The immanent god is the god within all forms of matter and consciousness. This god is the god within the world as idea. The transcendent god is the ruler of fate and destiny.
The immanent god is the source of objectivity and
the transcendent god is the source of subjectivity.
It seems to me that evolution has two centres of orientation : these centres can be called the little view and the big view. In the little view, evolution of consciousness becomes the drama of the soul’s development, as it superimposes its own ideas on reality, using the ego as the prime actor in the drama. And in the big view, it is also a dialogue between the unfolding awareness of the immanent god and the neutrally-observing transcendent god. [Hegel was the first thinker to realise the importance of the concept of the unfolding of awareness ; by comparison, religious thinkers usually prefer to reject it and yearn for a return to a state of original (static) awareness].
In my analysis, the theory of objective mind produces the same everyday results as realism (or materialism) does. Does it matter whether the world is interpreted as being mental or material? . I am still an objective Idealist since materialism cannot explain perception, psychic powers, healing, magic, miracles, etc, whereas the theory of objective mind can. The difference is one of degree and not of kind, by which I mean that materialism is a simplistic reduction of objective mind to a level that can be more easily assimilated. For the ordinary person in his ordinary world, theories of atheistic materialism and of objective mind produce identical results and influences. Only when a person starts treading the spiritual path does the higher meaning of objective mind become accessible.
It is hard enough to resist the glamour of material delights. It is even harder to rise above the attractions of psychic abilities. Neither materialism (as the world of objective reality) nor mind (as the world of subjective reality) represent the goal of my quest. I am aiming at attaining equanimity towards both these realities. My quest is a psychological journey between two worlds !
Nihilism and Oblivion
Each of these two worlds has its own pitfall, its own particular hell. These hells await the committed seeker who spectacularly fails in his personal quest.
Each person needs to feel that life is significant in some way for him if his life is to be worthwhile. The significance of life is a relative construction. Its objective mode is the forum of value within the fields of politics, religion, society, etc. This mode focuses on how to engage in life. The subjective mode is the forum of meaning within the same fields. This mode focuses on why the person should engage in life. If the person reaches an intuitive understanding that life no longer possesses any significance for him then he plunges into the void. The void is the end state of mind, and takes two forms, those of nihilism and oblivion.
The world of objective mind (or materialism) creates social reality, thereby producing the problem of value, or the saga of identification. It is the world of jealousy and power. The question ‘how to engage in life’ is solved by imitating role models of politicians, religious leaders, business magnates, etc. Competition rules, so people are adversaries and are there to be manipulated.
When this belief falls apart then objective values cease to have any influence on the ego. The collapse of objectivity produces nihilism and catatonia.
The world of subjective mind creates phantasy or imagination, and creativity, thereby producing the problem of meaning, or the saga of self-absorption. It is the world of narcissism and joy. The question ‘why should I engage in life’ is solved by the challenge of journeying into the unknown. Co-operation rules, so people are there to play together.
When this belief falls apart then subjective meanings cease to have any influence on the ego. Subjectivity becomes simply the awareness of unending sorrow. The collapse of subjectivity produces the desire for oblivion, the desire for the cessation of egoistic consciousness.
Existence before Essence
Power and joy are heaven. Nihilism and oblivion are hell. Heaven and hell are just states of mind. When the tragic ego can hold on to some shreds of belief, then some intermediate negative states may be grasped ; these are usually forms of madness.
It took me years to work out the difference between nihilism and oblivion ; I had to experience such states several times in order to get the understanding that I needed.
Nihilism is the end state of objective mind.
Oblivion is the end state of subjective mind.
These problems arise because the world has existence but no essence. The world is real but it has no intrinsic value or meaning. In Buddhist terminology, the world exhibits only emptiness (or lack of essence).
In the evolution of human consciousness, mind is at a higher stage than materialism. Nihilism is transcended by graduating to subjective mind. And oblivion is transcended by union with god. Therefore:
In materialism, nihilism is overcome by self-absorption. This requires faith in oneself.
In subjective mind, oblivion is overcome by seeking absorption in some aspect of god. This requires grace.
The problem of the end states arises because the world has existence but no essence. As an existentialist I agree with Jean-Paul Sartre that my existence comes before my essence. And so as an existentialist I have to create my own meanings and values (which then become my essence). These creations are not as limitless as it might seem. I have to create my own meanings and values, but I have limited choice. Karma puts boundaries on my free will. Karma acts so as to guide or constrain my choices. By doing this, karma governs my path through life. I have to go where the spiritual world wants me to go.
This role of karma indicates to me that evolution is teleological, that it has a purpose. What the purpose is, I do not know. This role of karma is its primary function: karma enables the divine ‘blue-print’ of evolution to unfold in the requisite manner. The age-old description of karma as divine justice is misleading.
Primary Motivation
Depending on the view of life that the individual uses, either will or mind can be seen to be primary. My choice as to primary motivation is based on my understanding of the problems of the infant.
In another article I discussed subconscious motivation, which is more or less another name for determinism. I considered whether it is due to delusion (as an aspect of mind) or whether it is due to unconscious will (Schopenhauer’s view). I repeat the way that I formulated this question. [²]
Determinism means that a person is subject to subconscious motivation. In a situation that he finds distressful, the person is being motivated to act in a certain way by some strong impulse that he is not aware of: his motivation is subconscious and compulsive.
Is subconscious motivation the way of consciously using the mind in response to subconscious will, or the way of consciously using the will in response to subconscious mind ? What would be the difference ?
The answer that I give now is that subconscious motivation is due to both. The infant yearns for absorption in divine love ; this yearning is produced by unconscious will. When the desire for absorption is thwarted it leads to delusion as a compensation, as well as to the production of confusion. In this view, subconscious mind as the superficial origin of motivation is overlaid on unconscious will as the deep source of motivation (the desire to return to the source of oneself). Confusion and desire arise due to the failure to become absorbed in divine love.
Schopenhauer considered that the will is blind and impersonal (or arbitrary). This is an accurate description of the will when the primary motivation towards absorption is frustrated. The frustrated will seeks compensation by becoming absorbed in materialism – this process is arbitrary and reflects social conditioning. The individual uses his will in an arbitrary way. Even though he has some degree of free will in the conscious way that he uses it, his use of will is still blind and confused. But then this use inaugurates the chain of psychological causality or karma. The purpose of awareness training is to learn to use the will in harmonious ways, in ways that reduce delusion and further personal evolution.
Will or Mind
I consider the will and the mind within a cosmic scenario. I start from the premiss that subjectivity always precedes objectivity.
I assume that in the course of cosmic evolution the subjective dream state of universal mind arose before ‘objective’ materialism did. The world of objective reality is a secondary emission and represents the stabilisation and solidification of a cosmic dream (that is, turning a potential world – the dream – into a concrete reality).
In a dream, universal mind is dominant. Mind imposes forms on sensation, but forms are transient. Mind imposes forms by creating laws of association. Imposing forms on sensation has the effect of creating concepts or ideas.
In the world of objective reality (the waking world), universal will is dominant. Mind still imposes forms, but now the will maintains these forms. This is done by the creation of forces of nature, which are different types of objectified will. [³]. The subjective laws of association of the dream world are transposed into objective laws of attraction and repulsion in the waking world. Attraction and repulsion are the basis of all the laws of Nature. These processes turn the dream idea into a physical object.
The difference between idea and object is that the object is an ‘objectified’ idea, an idea maintained by god’s will. The object is dependent on the idea in objective mind ; then, through the process of perception, the object generates an idea in the subjective mind of the human observer. The human then uses his will to engage himself in the world of ideas. The sequence between mind and will leads to activity in the world of reality.
The sequence is from mind (of god) to will (of god)
to mind (of human observer) to will (of human observer).
Cosmic Evolution
I add some more ideas in order to produce a general format of cosmic evolution. Human consciousness consists of will, mind and feeling. I presume that this is modelled on the form that god's consciousness takes within creation (the immanent, or impersonal, form of god). So we have three universal aspects of divine consciousness that underlie the processes of the world.
a) Universal feeling, which appears as charge in matter and feeling in human consciousness, causes perpetual change. [4]
b) Universal mind creates laws of Nature ; these laws govern the way that change occurs. Mind creates laws in order to manifest the endless change into forms or ideas ; then the forms continue to change in ways regulated by such laws.
c) Universal will creates forces of Nature ; these forces maintain the forms, without interfering with the process of change. Forces direct change but do not initiate any change or end it. For example, the force of gravity does not make an apple fall off a tree ; instead, once the apple separates (as a result of change) from the tree then gravity directs it to fall downwards and not upwards or sideways.
In addition, within human consciousness, desire is the product of will and mind, and emotion the product of feeling and mind. Desire can be long-term and stable, whilst emotions change frequently.
By analogy, the combination of universal will and universal mind creates the life force (or the evolutionary aspect of Nature) that powers creation. And the combination of universal feeling and universal mind creates the energy of creation. Since feeling fluctuates, so energy changes and Nature has its seasons.
Mind helps to give energy to ‘matter’. Energy enables mind to create its shapes or forms. Mind gives potential energy to the apple on the tree, and this energy partially transforms into kinetic energy when the apple falls to the ground (on the ground, the apple has less potential energy). The evolution of the material world can be seen as the overall transformation of potential energy into kinetic energy: the transformation of static forms into dynamic forms. The whole world of creation is just the drama of this transformation.
Therefore :
Change derives from Feeling.
Patterns of change derive from Mind.
Stability of patterns derives from Will.
A deduction from these ideas. I have dreams that are different from one another. So too god can dream different dreams. Each different dream can produce different laws of association. Hence different dreams give rise to different worlds of waking reality, each with its own special laws of Nature. This means that it is unlikely that the laws of Nature on Earth are the same everywhere else in creation. A Black Hole is obviously a different dream from that of our solar system.
The number in brackets at the end of each reference takes you back to the paragraph that featured it. See Links page for the addresses of my websites.
[¹]. Articles on philosophical Idealism are the subject of section 4 - Mind. See List of Additional Articles. For another view on my metaphysics, see the article Monism and Dualism. [1]
[²]. The article on subconscious motivation and determinism is Confusion, on my website Discover Your Mind. [2]
[³]. The concept that forces of nature are different types of objectified will was put forward by Arthur Schopenhauer. See the article Will and Representation. [3]
[4]. The relation between charge and feeling is described in the article Charge and Feeling. [4]
Books
Schopenhauer, Arthur.
The World as Will and Representation. Dover Publications,
USA, 1969. In two volumes.
|
The articles in this section are :
End States of Mind
Copyright
© 2003 Ian Heath
All Rights Reserved
The copyright is mine, and the article is free to use. It can be reproduced anywhere, so long as the source is acknowledged.
Ian Heath
London, UKMy email address is likely to change.
So if you want to write to me, go to the Home page and use the address at the bottom,or click on http://www.modern-thinker.co.uk/