BothAndBlog Forum

Cultural Relativism: Science, Religion and Truth?
https://thephilosophyforum.com/profile/ ... 473/gnomon

I do wonder if I am if I am the only person on the forum who has explored the territory between materialist science and other alternatives, — Jack Cummins

Oh, no, you are not alone in the middle range of worldviews. Unfortunately, that middle is a muddle, with no single moderate belief system dominating. Just as political rivals tend to become polarized, rival worldviews tend to cause people to move toward one extreme or the other. Modern Science, as it emerged in the Enlightenment age, sought to distinguish itself from then-current world-dominating belief system of Roman Catholicism, by emphasizing Doubt over Faith, and Practical this-worldly Utility over Postponed other-worldly Salvation. That leaves philosophically-minded folks in the no-man's-land of open-minded skepticism. Which is why my personal worldview of Enformationism, has adopted the BothAnd Principle as a means to having the best of both worldviews : practical & ethical effects ; objective & subjective truths. Unfortunately, maintaining that precarious balance is a high-wire act.

Enformationism :
* As a scientific paradigm, the thesis of Enformationism is intended to be an update to the obsolete 19th century paradigm of Materialism. Since the recent advent of Quantum Physics, the materiality of reality has been watered down. Now we know that matter is a form of energy, and that energy is a form of Information.
* As a religious philosophy, the creative power of Enformationism is envisioned as a more realistic version of the antiquated religious notions of Spiritualism. Since our world had a beginning, it's hard to deny the concept of creation. So, an Aristotelian First Cause is proposed to serve as both the universal Enformer (energy) and the malleable Substance (matter) of the evolving world.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html

BothAnd Principle :
My coinage for the holistic principle of Complementarity, as illustrated in the Yin/Yang symbol. Opposing or contrasting concepts are always part of a greater whole. Conflicts between parts can be reconciled or harmonized by putting them into the context of a whole system.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page10.html

BothAnd-ism :
An inclusive philosophical perspective that values both Subjective and Objective information; both Feelings and Facts; both Mysteries and Matters-of-fact; both Animal and Human nature.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page10.html

But apart from the idea of providing a system of convergence I think that there is a need for more discussion between those who hold religious perspectives and the various scientific viewpoints. — Jack Cummins

There won't be a detente between Science's Materialists and Religion's Spiritualists until they find some kind of common ground. For me, that common denominator is Generic (universal) Information. In the form of invisible causal Energy, Information -- or what I call EnFormAction -- serves the same role as Spirit in ancient worldviews.

For example, Chinese "Chi" and Indian "Prana" were imagined as analogous to spiritual energies that caused various changes in bodies, including Life itself. In the Frankenstein novel, electrical energy was the cause of re-vivifying the dead body of the monster. Also, in it's visible tangible form of Matter, Energy is converted into the materials that scientists study empirically. Moreover, what we call "Mind", is well-known as the processing of Information, which is both the data being acted upon, and the causal force behind of the process of Thinking or Minding.

At the same time, Information has the potential to convert its Energy into Matter (E=MC^2). And cutting-edge physics has done it both ways. See Scientific American article below.

Therefore, in the Enformationism worldview, Generic Information bridges the gap between Physics & Metaphysics, between Matter & Mind, between Science & Religion. But, until a significant percentage of the world population accepts that underlying commonality, we will continue to talk past each other in our ecumenical efforts.


Chi : (Qi or Ki) is the energy of life itself, a balance of Yin and Yang, positive and negative, electromagnetic energy which flows through everything in creation. So Chi can possibly be described as an electromagnetic phenomenon, as a form of light energy, as a form of bio-electromagnetic energy or electricity.

Consciousness as a Physical Process Caused by the Organization of Energy in the Brain :
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225786/

What is EnFormAction? : http://bothandblog2.enformationism.info/page29.html

Physics Is Pointing Inexorably to Mind : Matter is done away with and only information itself is taken to be ultimately real. This abstract notion, called information realism . . . .
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/ob ... y-to-mind/

So, I am asking about the whole question of truth arising from the clash between religion and science and divergent systems of thinking. Is there one which is the ultimate in terms of establishing truth? — Jack Cummins

I view the recurrent "clashes" between Religion and Science as an example of Hegel's Historical Dialectic. It's how Evolution works : ups & downs, but gradual progress. The Dialectic is a Heuristic searching process, perhaps working its way toward ultimate Truth. The key to Cultural progress is to learn from the past, but plan for the future.

Hegel : The notion that history conforms to a “dialectical” pattern, according to which contradictions generated at one level are overcome or transcended at the next,

Galileo : "The intention of [the Bible] is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heavens go."

Teilhard deChardin : The Omega Point is the subject of a belief that everything in the universe is fated to spiral towards a final point of unification.

Stephen Jay Gould : Non-Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA) is a philosophical world view that places religion and science in separate domains of questioning

Note -- Unfortunately, Gould's plea for mutual respect for separate domains of authority was well-intended, but impractical. Realistically, Science and Religion do indeed overlap in some areas. That's where the clashes occur, in which dominance may change hands. Yet, that's also how history, and human culture, progresses, in a back & forth ratcheting action, but generally upward in both technical knowledge and in collective morality.

http://gnomon.enformationism.info/Image ... -14-07.jpg

I have probably chosen to think away from the 'mystical' because I have done academic studies in psychology and mental health care. But I have read a lot of esoteric philosophy at times as well. — Jack Cummins

Occult Mysticism and Explicit Science are two different perspectives on the same world. Holistic Mystics tend to view the world metaphorically (poetically) as a system of unanalyzed concepts (symbols, feelings), taken at face value, without getting into the details. But Analytical Scientists are just the opposite : they want to delve into details, in order to dispel the mysteries, and to uncover the unknowns.

Scientists are curious cats, constantly probing deeper into dark places, and being skeptical of motives when told "don't go there". On the other hand, Mystics seem to enjoy the childlike wondrous feeling of being dependent on magical forces beyond understanding (trusting faith). Esoteric worldviews require specialized Priests or Adepts, who do the understanding of complex mysteries on behalf of the children, the flock. But scientists don't like being treated like children, who "can't handle the Truth".

Ironically, some religious people (theologians) tend toward an analytical scientific worldview, while some quantum scientists come close to being mysterians --- "shut-up and calculate". Although I lean more toward the scientific worldview, my personal BothAnd principle requires me to take into account the ambiguous realities of Cultural Relativism.

Esoteric : intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.
Note -- Both Science and Mysticism have their Gnostic Adepts, who interpret abstruse concepts for the ignorant masses. But they differ in their attitude toward "blissful" ignorance.

Mysterians : The mysterians propose that human intellect has boundaries and that some of nature's mysteries may forever lie beyond our comprehension.

Mysterian Science : https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... l-and-god/

Dualist Mysterians : The “old mysterians” were dualists who believed in nonmaterial properties, such as the soul, that cannot be explained by natural processes.
https://michaelshermer.com/sciam-column ... -will-god/

Shut-up and Calculate : One of the biggest dangers in presenting quantum unknowns is sophism; a wasteful exercise in fruitless scholasticism and mysticism.
“If I were forced to sum up in one sentence what the Copenhagen interpretation says to me, it would be ‘Shut up and calculate!’ ”
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.10 ... 70815-7_10

BothAnd Principle : Conceptually, the BothAnd principle is similar to Einstein's theory of Relativity, in that what you see ─ what’s true for you ─ depends on your perspective, and your frame of reference; for example, subjective or objective, religious or scientific, reductive or holistic, pragmatic or romantic, conservative or liberal, earthbound or cosmic. Ultimate or absolute reality (ideality) doesn't change, but your conception of reality does. Opposing views are not right or wrong, but more or less accurate for a particular purpose.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page10.html

Both/And thinking : Like fuzziness, both/and is well illustrated by the Yin-Yang symbol and Yin-Yang thinking
https://www.beyondwilber.ca/healing-thi ... logic.html

I just looked at your links now and liked the idea by Rolf Satler, that, 'Buddhist logic is liberating because it transcends not only the restrictive either/ or of our common way of thinking, but even the both/and of the much more inclusive and healing both/and logic.' — Jack Cummins

I only recently became aware of Satler's site, espousing -- among other things -- "Both/And Logic". He seems to follow Ken Wilbur, and his Integral Theory philosophy. Although I read some of Wilbur's books, many years ago, my own BothAnd Principle developed directly from the Holistic implications of the Enformationism Thesis.

Wilbur seems to be mostly influenced by Eastern Philosophy, hence may be categorized as a New Age philosopher. I agree with much of his Holistic worldview, but he focuses more on spiritual & mystical aspects of the world --- along with Transpersonal Psychology, which may be a technical term for the study of Spirituality.

My own educational background was mostly influenced by Analytical Science and the mundane aspects of Reality, but my philosophical emphasis tends more toward Metaphysics, because that is the primary domain of Philosophy --- the "Linguistic Turn" of Postmodernism, and the recent Materialistic (anti-spiritual) backlash, notwithstanding. So, we have that psychological inclination in common. And Buddhism was an early "science" of human psychology. Likewise, Taoism is essentially a Holistic worldview.

The key to all of these holistic philosophical tropes is to include all aspects of the world, rather than totally rejecting certain aspects from consideration. That way we can put our own narrow perspective (partial truth) into a broader context.

Fuzzy Logic :
Fuzzy logic is a form of many-valued logic in which the truth values of variables may be any real number between 0 and 1. It is employed to handle the concept of partial truth, where the truth value may range between completely true and completely false.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page13.html

The BothAnd Philosophy :
* Philosophy is the study of ideas & beliefs. Not which are right or wrong – that is the province of Religion and Politics – but which are closer to universal Truth. That unreachable goal can only be approximated by Reason & Consensus, which is the method of Science. In addition to ivory tower theories, applied Philosophy attempts to observe the behavior of wild ideas in their natural habitat.
* The BothAnd philosophy is primarily Metaphysical, in that it is concerned with Ontology, Epistemology, & Cosmology. Those categories include abstract & general concepts, such as : G*D, existence, causation, Logic, Mathematics, & Forms.
* The BothAnd principle is one of Balance, Symmetry and Proportion. It eschews the absolutist positions of Idealism, in favor of the relative compromises of Pragmatism. It espouses the Practical Wisdom of the Greek philosophers, instead of the Divine Wisdom of the Hebrew Priests. The BA principle of practical wisdom requires “skin in the game”* to provide real-world feedback, which counter-balances the extremes of Idealism & Realism. That feedback establishes limits to freedom and boundaries to risk-taking. BA is a principle of Character & Virtue, viewed as Phronesis or Pragmatism, instead of Piety or Perfectionism.
* The BA philosophy is intended to be based on empirical evidence where possible, but to incorporate reasonable speculation were necessary. As my personal philosophy, the basic principle is fleshed-out in the worldview of Enformationism, which goes out of the Real world only insofar as to establish the universal Ground of Being, and the active principle in Evolution.

Notes -- Phronesis : an Ancient Greek word for a type of wisdom or intelligence. It is more specifically a type of wisdom relevant to practical action, implying both good judgement and excellence of character and habits, or practical virtue.
* ref : Skin In The Game, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb; researcher in philosophical, mathematical, and (mostly) practical problems with probability.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page10.html

'Within the deep silence of the great unborn, Spirit whispers a sublime secret, an otherwise hidden truth of one's very essence: You, in this and every moment, abide as Spirit itself, an immutable radiance beyond the mortal suffering of time and experience.' — Jack Cummins

When Wilbur talks like a poetic mystic, he loses me. I'm more of a mundane Pragmatist than a sublime Mystic. Nevertheless, some of the implications of the Enformationism thesis get pretty close to New Age notions of spirituality. But then, I try to keep my worldview grounded in objective Science, because mystical balloons that are not moored, tend to drift away into the ether, where fictions can feel good subjectively, but cannot be proven true factually. I try to make sense of both Ideality and Reality -- as aspects of one world. I try to keep an open mind, but not so open that my brains fall out.

Mystic : a person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect. ___Wiki

Intuition : Many people regard Reasoning the opposite of Intuition. Reasoning is rational thinking using logic, while Intuition is unconscious, a paranormal gift, a magical awareness not accessible for normal humans, or a connectivity to an all knowing esoteric field.
https://thinkibility.com/2012/11/17/rea ... intuition/

PS__I prefer a non-mystical definition of "Intuition".

I have to admit that even though I try to hold onto the objectivity of science the poetry of mysticism is my real language. — Jack Cummins

I think the appeal of Science (Engineering; Technology) is primarily to those who think Abstractly & Reductively, while the appeal of Mysticism (Spiritualism, Religion) is to those who think Concretely & Holistically. That may be an over-simplification of a complex topic, but it helps me to understand how & why reasonable people can hold such divergent worldviews.

Physics is the most abstract & reductive of the sciences, while Biology & Chemistry necessarily deal with more concrete subjects, but they still dissect their subjects into isolated parts. Meanwhile, Metaphysics -- the subject of Philosophy and Poetry -- covers those aspects of reality that cannot be seen or touched or cut, hence must be inferred, and can only be expressed in terms of analogies & metaphors : concrete comparisons. Imitating scientists, some philosophers try to use analytical scalpels for metaphysical topics, but the abstruse results of their dismemberment tend to lie lifeless, like vivisected frogs.

People seem to be born with innate tendencies toward one end or the other of the Reductive/Holistic spectrum. But most of us are somewhere in the middle. Famous mystics may see the world through rose-colored romantic holistic glasses, while famous scientists view reality via the gray pragmatic X-ray vision of Analysis. Each type can try to see the other's perspective, but it's like learning a new language, in a foreign culture.

The term "Holism" was originally a scientific concept, but later was adopted by New Agers because it fit neatly into the newly-popular imported religious philosophies of India and China. Scientists now prefer the term "Systems Theory", because of the mystical taint on "Holism". Ironically, some of the pioneers of Quantum Science were also influenced by Eastern holism. For example, Heisenberg -- after a journey to the Far East -- wrote "all fundamental aspects of physical reality, which had been so difficult for him and his fellow physicists to 'make sense of', was the very basis of the Indian spiritual tradition". Nevertheless, while I appreciate the broad general holistic wisdom of the ancients, I prefer to rely on modern science for an accurate understanding of the specific details.

While in college, I made a break with my Western religious upbringing, but still retained some affinity for holistic thinking. So for a while, I was attracted to Theosophy, which claimed to combine modern science with ancient wisdom traditions. Like, most of the New Age philosophies though, Theosophy has since fragmented into dozens of piecemeal worldviews ( e.g. Anthroposophy). So, I no longer find such mystical views attractive. However, I have developed my own personal worldview (Enformationism), which aims to bridge the abyss between Physics & Metaphysics, without going to extremes of Materialism or Mysticism.

Holism : Holism is the idea that various systems should be viewed as wholes, not merely as a collection of parts. The term "holism" was coined by Jan Smuts in his 1926 book Holism and Evolution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holism

Systems Theory : Systems theory, also called systems science, is the multidisciplinary study of systems to investigate phenomena from a holistic approach.

Theosophy : (god wisdom) is a religion established in the United States during the late nineteenth century. It was founded primarily by the Russian immigrant Helena Blavatsky and draws its teachings predominantly from Blavatsky's writings.
. . .any of a number of philosophies maintaining that a knowledge of God may be achieved through spiritual ecstasy, direct intuition, or special individual relations,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theosophy

The problem is that science doesn't really give us truth, as per my discussion with Jack above. What gives us truth is a particular attitude of honesty, and it is probably the case that religion would be better suited toward culturing this attitude. Science gives us useful principles, hypotheses, but truth being associated with correspondence, involves how we employ those principles. — Metaphysician Undercover

True. Typically, scientists don't claim to reveal absolute Truths, but merely useful facts that we can rely on for practical applications. But many Western religions make bold assertions of divine revelations of Eternal Truth. That is the root of the Science vs Religion controversy. I agree that religions would be less socially divisive, if they promoted the character trait of honest appraisal (self-skepticism) of one's own beliefs, with as much enthusiasm as they promote skepticism toward the unorthodox doctrines of other sects.

Science Does Not Reveal Truth : https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulmsutte ... 09bca038c3

Eternal Truth : Truth, eternal truth, is the groundwork of the Christian's hope: it is the only sure rock on which he can build.
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... 3?lang=eng

I was interested that you explored the area of theosophy. — Jack Cummins

When my exploration found that Theosophy was mostly Sophistry, I abandoned that path, and went-on to explore more fruitful concepts. Blavatsky & Steiner were very convincing to those who were Mystically inclined. But I'm more Practically inclined --- more like an engineer than an artist.

Sophistry (Rhetoric) : "Sophists did, however, have one important thing in common: whatever else they did or did not claim to know, they characteristically had a great understanding of what words would entertain or impress or persuade an audience."
The works of Plato and Aristotle have had much influence on the modern view of the "sophist" as a greedy instructor who uses rhetorical sleight-of-hand and ambiguities of language in order to deceive, or to support fallacious reasoning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophist
Note -- I view the 20th century "linguistic turn" of philosophy as mostly a return to Sophistry, wherein confusing word-play is used to obfuscate rather than to illuminate; to sound smart, rather than to be wise.

I find the systems view of life, advocated by Fritjof Capra to be extremely helpful as it is holistic and a good basis for drawing upon a variety of other, divergent perspectives. — Jack Cummins

Yes. Capra's synthesis of Western Science and Eastern Philosophy was more suitable to my taste. I've read several of his books. He may be considered fringey by some of his peers, but his ideas are more practical than most mystical notions. My personal worldview is intended to be a "Systems View" of life

I did wish to become an art therapist or a psychotherapist. However, there are very few jobs in this field. — Jack Cummins

I just learned that there is such a thing as a Logotherapist. Maybe that would be a job opportunity for someone philosophically inclined. I don't know anything about its efficacy, but its emphasis on finding meaning in life, sounds like a novel approach to depression and ennui.


Logotherapist : Logotherapy was developed by neurologist and psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, on a concept based on the premise that the primary motivational force of an individual is to find a meaning in life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logotherapy

https://themeaningseeker.org/logotherapy-training/