4149 lines
369 KiB
HTML
4149 lines
369 KiB
HTML
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
|
||
<html>
|
||
<head>
|
||
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
|
||
<title>What Ought To Be</title>
|
||
<meta name="generator" content="LibreOffice 4.2.8.2 (Linux)">
|
||
<meta name="author" content="Amr Gharbeia">
|
||
<meta name="created" content="20010831;0">
|
||
<meta name="changed" content="20150722;235918113653742">
|
||
<style type="text/css">
|
||
<!--
|
||
@page { margin-left: 2cm; margin-right: 1.2cm; margin-top: 1.2cm; margin-bottom: 1.25cm }
|
||
p { text-indent: 1.27cm; margin-bottom: 0.25cm; direction: ltr; color: #99ccff; line-height: 120%; text-align: left; widows: 2; orphans: 2 }
|
||
p.western { font-family: "Arial", sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; so-language: en-US }
|
||
p.cjk { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 10pt }
|
||
p.ctl { font-family: "Simplified Arabic"; font-size: 10pt; so-language: ar-EG }
|
||
p.sdendnote { margin-left: 0.6cm; text-indent: -0.6cm; margin-bottom: 0cm; direction: inherit; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 100%; text-align: left; widows: 0; orphans: 0 }
|
||
a:link { so-language: zxx }
|
||
a.sdendnoteanc { font-size: 57% }
|
||
-->
|
||
</style>
|
||
</head>
|
||
<body lang="en-GB" text="#99ccff" dir="ltr" style="background: transparent">
|
||
<div id="Frame1" dir="ltr" style="position: absolute; top: 0cm; left: 0cm; width: 16.8cm; height: 0.06cm; border: none; padding: 0cm; background: #ffffff">
|
||
<p lang="en-US" dir="rtl" class="western"><br><br>
|
||
</p>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif"><font size="4" style="font-size: 16pt"><b>What
|
||
Ought To Be</b></font></font></font></p>
|
||
<img src="" name="OdaWOught_up" align="left" hspace="5" width="82" height="30" border="0"><br clear="left">
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
implications of spatiomaterialism are ontologically necessary truths,
|
||
but there are two kinds of necessary truths. They are all
|
||
ontologically necessary <i>for reason</i>, because ontological
|
||
philosophy is an <i>argument </i>about the world directed toward
|
||
rational beings. But in addition to its theoretical function, reason
|
||
has a practical function, and since its practical function cannot be
|
||
entirely reduced to its theoretical function, there are necessary
|
||
truths about what ought to be, as far as reason is concerned, that
|
||
are not just truths about what is. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Ontological
|
||
philosophy is a two step argument. First, it argues that
|
||
spatiomaterialism is the best ontological explanation of the world,
|
||
and then it uses spatiomaterialism to show what must be true in a
|
||
spatiomaterial world. Such implications are ontologically necessary,
|
||
but many are conditional, because they also depend on space and
|
||
matter having the more specific essential natures that makes the
|
||
basic laws of physics true and that give the universe a large scale
|
||
structure of the kind it actually has. Conditionally necessary truths
|
||
hold only in spatiomaterial worlds <i>like ours</i>. There are, as we
|
||
have seen, many such truths about what is, most relevantly at this
|
||
point, including all those about progressive evolution. On suitable
|
||
planets, there is an evolutionary change that proceeds through a
|
||
series of stage in the direction of natural perfection, with each
|
||
stage being a gradual change in the direction of the natural
|
||
perfection of organisms (or primary structures) of its kind. And
|
||
since it is a (conditionally) necessary truth, evolution would unfold
|
||
in basically the same way in any spatiomaterial world like ours.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Reason
|
||
itself is, however, something that comes to exist in that grand
|
||
process. A series of inevitable stages of biological evolution (by
|
||
natural selection) leads to rational beings, and since spiritual
|
||
animals contain within themselves cultural evolution (by rational
|
||
selection), which eventually includes progress in natural science
|
||
(sponsored, in part, by economic evolution through capitalist
|
||
selection), reason eventually comes to understand how the world is
|
||
whole. That is, as we have seen, what ontological philosophy
|
||
contributes to cultural evolution at the philosophical stage in the
|
||
wake of the failure of epistemological philosophy. Ontological
|
||
philosophy is an argument about the wholeness of the world that is
|
||
made to beings that exist necessarily in that world. Thus, rational
|
||
beings eventually come to recognize their own nature and their place
|
||
in the world, and since that self-understanding is itself part of the
|
||
wholeness of the world, it plays a role in what happens in the world.
|
||
“Ontological reason,” as I will call it, has work to do. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">What
|
||
reason comes to know about its nature, with the evolution of
|
||
ontological philosophy, includes recognizing its own function as a
|
||
behavior guidance system. Guiding behavior is the basic function of
|
||
what evolves at every stage of biological evolution, and reason
|
||
guides the behavior not only of individual subjects, but also of
|
||
spiritual animals, the social level animals of which rational
|
||
subjects are the parts. Its function as a behavior guidance system
|
||
explains, as have seen, the difference between theoretical and
|
||
practical reason. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Practical
|
||
reason is as basic as theoretical reason. Indeed, the original
|
||
function of arguments about the true is to enable reason to discover
|
||
the good. Reason would not have evolved by natural selection if the
|
||
cultural evolution of theoretical arguments by rational selection did
|
||
not make it possible for reason to discover what is good for rational
|
||
beings (that is, what contributes to their maximum holistic power, or
|
||
natural perfection). Thus, in addition to its theoretical role,
|
||
reason has a practical employment. Reason is something that acts in
|
||
the world. That is why there is a difference between conclusions
|
||
about what is and what ought to be among the necessary truths proved
|
||
by ontological philosophy. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">With
|
||
the evolution of ontological philosophy, therefore, reason
|
||
understands its own nature as a behavior guidance system that evolves
|
||
by reproductive causation, and it recognizes its place in the world.
|
||
The function of reason is to guide the behavior of the most powerful
|
||
organisms that come to exist in evolution, and so ontological reason
|
||
comes to recognize itself as the most powerful being in the world.
|
||
This self-understanding might even be called the <i>outcome </i>of
|
||
evolution in a spatiomaterial world like ours, at least, so far,
|
||
since it happens at the end of a series of inevitable evolutionary
|
||
stages. But the advent of ontological philosophy is not the end of
|
||
evolution. Its explanation of the wholeness of the world is merely
|
||
the point at which reason discovers its own real nature and begins to
|
||
assume its full power. And since reason has a practical, as well as a
|
||
theoretical, function, it can be described as the point at which
|
||
ontological reason (still evolving by rational selection) takes over
|
||
from biological evolution and controls the course evolution. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, the
|
||
wholeness of the world is not merely that everything in the world and
|
||
everything about the world is constituted by space and matter. Nor is
|
||
it merely that its essential nature entails that a part of any
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours inevitably comes to understand its
|
||
wholeness. It also includes how that understanding of its wholeness
|
||
leads reason to act in a way that ultimately <i>makes </i>the world
|
||
more "whole." That is the <i>work </i>of ontological
|
||
reason.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>Predicting
|
||
the future of evolution.</i> It might seem that what ontological
|
||
reason does in the world ought to be counted among the necessary
|
||
truths about what is, because cultural evolution, including its
|
||
evolution, is a global regularity like the rest of evolution and,
|
||
thus, can be predicted. As a behavior guidance system, reason pursues
|
||
the good, and since goodness is contributing to natural perfection,
|
||
what is good is a fact about the world. Thus, what reason does in the
|
||
world can be predicted. That means that it is one of the necessary
|
||
truths about <i>what is </i>in the world that reason discovers, which
|
||
suggests that there is no need to distinguish from <i>what is</i> a
|
||
set of necessary truths about <i>what ought to be</i>. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In a sense,
|
||
it is true that what ontological reason does can be predicted, for it
|
||
is inevitable. But it is not merely an ontologically necessary truth
|
||
about what is in a spatiomaterial world like ours, because unlike
|
||
earlier stages of evolution, what happens depends on ontologically
|
||
necessary truths about what ought to be. That is, what makes those
|
||
predictions about the future after the advent of ontological reason
|
||
turn out to be true is that rational being do what is good, and so
|
||
the only way to predict what will happen is to work out what
|
||
ontological reason discovers about what ought to exist. That is not
|
||
something that can be predicted by knowing what is good for rational
|
||
beings in the sense of contributing to their natural perfection as
|
||
rational beings. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">After
|
||
recapping the ontological explanation of the nature of goodness and
|
||
considering more carefully why it seems that practical reason can be
|
||
reduced to theoretical reason, I will explain why necessary truths
|
||
about <i>what ought to be </i>are not entirely reducible to necessary
|
||
truths about <i>what is. </i>Then I will take up the implications of
|
||
spatiomaterialism about the goals that reason ought to pursue (in its
|
||
individual self interest, its spiritual self interest, and its
|
||
religious self interest). </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>Goodness.</b></i>
|
||
The nature of goodness is explained, as we have seen, by the
|
||
progressiveness of evolution by reproductive causation. Not only does
|
||
evolution have an inevitable beginning in a spatiomaterial world like
|
||
ours, but it also involves change in the direction of natural
|
||
perfection. And natural perfection has a structure that determines
|
||
what is good. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>Natural
|
||
perfection.</i> Setting reason aside for the moment, reproductive
|
||
causation generates four different forms of natural perfection: the
|
||
natural perfection of the <i>organism</i>, of the <i>ecology</i>, of
|
||
<i>life </i>and of <i>change </i>itself. That is, they follow from
|
||
the two main reproductive global regularities, gradual and
|
||
revolutionary evolution.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Organism.</i>
|
||
At each stage of evolution, there are reproducing organisms (or
|
||
primary structures) that start off simple, uniform and weak, and
|
||
during the stage, they gradually become more complex, diverse and
|
||
powerful, until each kind of organism is as powerful at controlling
|
||
all the conditions that affect its reproduction as possible for
|
||
primary structures of its kind. Such maximum holistic power is the
|
||
natural perfection for organisms. It is an optimal part-whole
|
||
relation in which no possible change in the parts will make the whole
|
||
more powerful, though this maximum may be approached only
|
||
asymptotically. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Ecology.</i>
|
||
But since maximum holistic power for organisms (i.e., primary
|
||
structures) also involves their becoming more diverse, the direction
|
||
of gradual change is also toward maximum holistic power for the
|
||
ecology. It is a holistic power, because it is the power of all the
|
||
organisms in the region. But the appropriate measure of the power
|
||
that is maximized at the ecological level is different. As the
|
||
organisms all become naturally perfect, the right kinds and varieties
|
||
of organisms exist to consume as much of the available free energy to
|
||
fuel reproductive cycles as possible. Making maximum use of the
|
||
ultimate source of the power to do work in the region is the natural
|
||
perfection for the ecology. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Life.</i>
|
||
But one stage of evolution can make another stage inevitable. When
|
||
the organisms evolving at one stage have structures that can be
|
||
organized as the several parts of an organism on higher levels of
|
||
organization (that is, whose primary structures have higher levels of
|
||
part-whole complexity), and when that makes it possible for the whole
|
||
to control a range of relevant conditions that were previously out of
|
||
reach, such a radical random variation begins a new stage of gradual
|
||
evolution during which those organisms and the ecology they help make
|
||
up (along with organisms from previous stages) become naturally
|
||
perfect for their kinds. The succession of evolutionary stages uses
|
||
the part-whole relation in space to expand the power of organisms, as
|
||
primary structures generating reproductive cycles, to control what
|
||
happens in the world, step by step, increasing the level of
|
||
organization of the natural perfection involved. Hence, revolutionary
|
||
evolution is in the direction of the natural perfection of life
|
||
itself, or the very enterprise of controlling conditions in the
|
||
world. Reproductive causation makes the most of the spatial structure
|
||
of the world by using the part-whole relation in space to increase
|
||
the holistic power of organisms of all kinds to control what happens
|
||
in the world.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Change.</i>
|
||
Finally, since evolution is progressive, there is even a natural
|
||
perfection about the kind of change that is involved in evolution.
|
||
Since evolution is a global regularity caused by how reproductive
|
||
cycles add up in space <i>as time passes</i>, each moment during each
|
||
stage of gradual evolution makes a necessary contribution to the
|
||
increasing power of the organisms and the ecology at that stage. And
|
||
since evolutionary stages are caused by levels of part-whole
|
||
complexity in evolving structures, each stage makes an necessary
|
||
contribution to the increasing power of life. Thus, by using each
|
||
moment in the existence of the substances involved to increase the
|
||
power of material structures to do work, reproductive causation gives
|
||
change itself a kind of natural perfection. It makes the most out of
|
||
the temporal nature of the world by using the succession of moments
|
||
in which substances exist to increase the power of organisms to
|
||
control what happens in the world. No moment is redundant or
|
||
superfluous.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>The
|
||
nature of goodness.</i> Natural perfection is an explanation of the
|
||
nature of goodness, because natural perfection is an optimal
|
||
part-whole relation. Though the part-whole relation is somewhat
|
||
different in each form of natural perfection, in each case, parts of
|
||
certain kinds are combined in certain ways and numbers to make the
|
||
most out of the least. "The most" always has to do with the
|
||
power of the whole to use free energy to control what happens in the
|
||
world, and "the least" has to do with the number and
|
||
simplicity of the parts. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Natural
|
||
perfection is a property of the whole, and the corresponding property
|
||
of the parts of such wholeness is goodness. Goodness is the property
|
||
of contributing to the natural perfection of the whole of which it is
|
||
part. But since there are different forms of natural perfection,
|
||
there are different ways that that things can be good.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Organism.</i>
|
||
In the case of the organism, the parts are the structural causes that
|
||
are bundled together to go through reproductive cycles as a whole,
|
||
and things are good for the organism when they are involved in
|
||
generating the non-reproductive structural effects that help give it
|
||
the maximum power to control the conditions that affect its
|
||
reproduction. Thus, certain kinds of traits are good for the organism
|
||
because of their functions, that is, because of which relevant
|
||
conditions they control. And certain kinds of behavior are good for
|
||
the organism because of its goals, including, in the case of animals,
|
||
animal behavior, whose goals involve behavior directed at other
|
||
objects in space in order to control relevant conditions. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Ecology.</i>
|
||
In the case of the ecology, the parts are the organisms in the
|
||
region, and things are good for the ecology when they help the
|
||
organisms jointly consume as much as possible of the free energy
|
||
available in the region as fuel for reproductive cycles. Each kind of
|
||
organisms is good for the ecology because of the form of free energy
|
||
it taps or the way in which it does so. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Life.</i>
|
||
In the case of life, the parts are the successive levels of
|
||
part-whole complexity in the reproducing organisms that evolve at
|
||
each stage of evolution, and things are good for life itself because
|
||
they are involved in the evolution of another level of organization
|
||
that helps life control as much as possible what happens in the
|
||
world. Thus, certain levels of biological, neurological and forensic
|
||
organization in evolving structures are good for life because each is
|
||
necessary for life to evolve another range of powers and, thus, step
|
||
by step, as much power to control conditions affecting reproduction
|
||
as possible for living organisms. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Change.</i>
|
||
In the case of change itself, the parts are particular stages in the
|
||
overall course of evolution and particular moments during each stage,
|
||
and things are good for change itself when events unfold in a way
|
||
that helps bring about the natural perfection organisms, ecology and
|
||
life. Thus, even such events as organisms failing to reproduce
|
||
because of scarcity and species becoming extinct because other
|
||
species displace them from their ecological niche are good because
|
||
that is how reproductive causation makes evolution progressive. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>The
|
||
unity of goodness. </i>Though things are good in various ways,
|
||
ultimately, they are all good in the same way, because there is a
|
||
necessary overall structure to the various kinds of natural
|
||
perfection to which they all contribute. Naturally perfect organisms
|
||
are essential parts of naturally perfect ecologies, and stages of
|
||
gradual evolution in the direction of such natural perfection are
|
||
essential to the overall evolutionary change in the direction of the
|
||
natural perfection of life. And all the events that occur in the
|
||
course of evolution are essential to the natural perfection of
|
||
change, since that is what makes evolution progressive. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is true
|
||
that what is good for one organism might be bad for another. The
|
||
predator <i>is </i>bad for the prey. But since the natural perfection
|
||
to which they both contribute is a single spatiotemporal whole with
|
||
an overall structure, there is no ultimate conflict about whether
|
||
something is good or bad. Everything good is good because it
|
||
contributes to some form of natural perfection that is part of that
|
||
overall structure. Thus, what is bad for the prey is good not only
|
||
for the predator, but also for the ecology, and it is by contributing
|
||
to the natural perfection of the ecology that the prey is good (and
|
||
that what contributes to the natural perfection of the prey is good).
|
||
There is no context in which contributing to natural perfection, or
|
||
natural perfection itself, could turn out to be bad.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>The
|
||
apparent reducibility of practical to theoretical reason.</b></i>
|
||
Since what is good is a fact about the world, or an aspect of what
|
||
is, it is something that theoretical reason knows at the ontological
|
||
philosophical stage, for that includes knowledge of the nature of
|
||
goodness. And since reason gives rational beings the autonomy to do
|
||
the good because they believe that it is good, it should be possible
|
||
to predict what ontological reason will ultimately do in the world. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">To
|
||
know the course of evolution, it is not necessary to know all the
|
||
details about how it will happen, because it is a global regularity
|
||
about what happens in whole regions of space. This holds for cultural
|
||
evolution by rational selection as well. It is possible to know how
|
||
culture will evolve without predicting all the details. That is,
|
||
after all, how we know that the evolution of ontological philosophy
|
||
is inevitable. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Even before
|
||
reason discovers the nature of goodness, it is sometimes able to tell
|
||
what is good, because rational imagination enables rational subjects
|
||
to discern what is naturally perfect. Reason can see the uniqueness
|
||
of the naturally perfect, because it stands out against the
|
||
background of what all is possible. Thus, reason can tell, in
|
||
principle, what is good for any organism, for the ecology, and for
|
||
life itself. Even in the case of individual subjects and spiritual
|
||
animals, where inherited desires have the function of picking out
|
||
goals to be pursued, reason judges which actions are good by their
|
||
contribution to the natural perfection of the whole of which they are
|
||
part. Thus, it is possible to predict what reason will wind up
|
||
believing and doing. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, when
|
||
reason discovers how the world is whole and comes to understand its
|
||
own nature and its own place in evolution, it will use its
|
||
understanding of the nature of goodness to sharpen its perception of
|
||
what is naturally perfect and, thereby, discover more accurately and
|
||
completely what is good. Though it will still be a result of cultural
|
||
evolution by rational selection, rational subjects will be better
|
||
able to judge which arguments make their world view more coherent,
|
||
because they will understand how everything in the world fits
|
||
together as a whole and that will constrain their views on particular
|
||
normative issues in ways that previously seemed impossible. The
|
||
completeness of their understanding of the nature of the world is
|
||
what enables reason to see which truths are necessary, including
|
||
necessary truths about what is good. And since reason will recognize
|
||
itself as having, in its practical employment as behavior guidance
|
||
system, the function of doing what is good for rational beings, it
|
||
will do whatever it discovers to be good for itself. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Thus,
|
||
it seems that there is no basic difference between the implications
|
||
of spatiomaterialism about <i>what exists</i> and <i>what ought to
|
||
exist</i>. What ontological reason will do in the world is
|
||
inevitable, like any stage of evolution, and thus, it is something
|
||
that can be known by theoretical reason alone. Since practical reason
|
||
does not play an essential role in explaining what reason ought to
|
||
do, necessary truths about <i>what ought to be </i>can be reduced to
|
||
necessary truths about <i>what is</i>. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>The
|
||
irreducibility of practical reason.</b></i> Contrary to this
|
||
impression, however, the necessary truths of practical reason about
|
||
what ought to be cannot be eliminated in favor of necessary truths of
|
||
theoretical reason about what is. There are two reasons, one
|
||
superficial and the other more profound. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">First,
|
||
some of the goals that reason will pursue are optional. Reason gives
|
||
subjects the capacity to do what is good because it is good, that is,
|
||
simply because they believe that it is good, and as we have seen,
|
||
that means that rational subjects can pursue goals in addition to
|
||
those that control relevant conditions (that is, in addition to
|
||
conditions that affect their own reproduction). These “optional
|
||
goals” must already be good (by contributing to natural or
|
||
artificial perfection in some way), but there is such a wide range of
|
||
goals to choose from that it is not possible to predict which ones
|
||
will be chosen. And since choosing them is what makes them <i>good
|
||
for the rational subject</i>, it is not possible to predict all of
|
||
the goals that rational beings will pursue. It is also possible for
|
||
spiritual animals to pursue optional goals. Thus, the future course
|
||
of evolution is, in principle, not predictable. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Optional
|
||
goals for rational beings are like aspects of biological evolution
|
||
that are contingent. It is not possible to predict contingent aspects
|
||
of evolution, because they are not essential to the global regularity
|
||
caused ontologically by reproductive cycles and space. Indeed, it is
|
||
not always easy to see, even in retrospect, what is inevitable about
|
||
the course of biological evolution and what is not. Since optional
|
||
goals are contingent, what reason does in pursuit of them is not
|
||
predicable. Thus, if optional goals are as big a part of what
|
||
ontological reason does as its power would suggest, much of the
|
||
future course of evolution is not predictable, at least not on
|
||
ontological grounds.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The pursuit
|
||
of optional goals means that what reason does in the world is more
|
||
like the creation of something beautiful, like a work of art, rather
|
||
than something it discovers, like a truth about the world. There will
|
||
be a perfection about it, but since it is an expression of a unique
|
||
form of life, it will be a unique form of beauty. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Though
|
||
ontological philosophy includes everything that reason can know about
|
||
the nature of the world, the future course of evolution will depend
|
||
on the optional goals it chooses to pursue, and thus, reason stands
|
||
to its work in the world like each rational subject stands to his or
|
||
her own Self. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Insofar as
|
||
the future course of evolution is not predictable, it cannot be among
|
||
the necessary truths of ontological philosophy about what is, and
|
||
thus, practical reason cannot be reduced to theoretical reason. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Second,
|
||
there is a more profound reason why practical reason cannot be
|
||
reduced to theoretical reason. That is because reasoning about what
|
||
ought to be may make the pursuit of certain goals inevitable for
|
||
ontological reason, even though they cannot be predicted from what is
|
||
good for reason as a behavior guidance system for individuals and
|
||
spiritual animals. Doing what is good for the world as a whole is
|
||
such a goal, and it may be a necessary truth about <i>what is </i>in
|
||
a spatiomaterial world like ours that they are pursued. But it is an
|
||
ontologically necessary truth about <i>what is </i>that can be known
|
||
only by reasoning about <i>what rational beings ought to do</i>.
|
||
Thus, we cannot know whether there are any such goals without
|
||
following out all the practical implications of our ontological
|
||
foundation. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Goals that
|
||
would be of this kind are ordinarily called “religious,” because
|
||
they come from the recognition that there is something that is worthy
|
||
of worship. Such a religious interest may not be reducible to the
|
||
individual or spiritual interest of rational beings, because it could
|
||
depend on recognizing the existence of God. And if God is not
|
||
necessarily a transcendent being, naturalism does not rule out the
|
||
possibility of God's existence.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Though
|
||
religious goals are pursued before the evolution of ontological
|
||
philosophy, that earlier pursuit of religious goals is among the
|
||
necessary truths of theoretical reason (about what is), because
|
||
religious goals (and the beliefs about God on which they are
|
||
predicated) can be predicted, as we have seen, by the function of
|
||
religion at the rational spiritual stage (that is, as the attempt to
|
||
provide an ultimate justification of the principles of practical
|
||
arguments, including morality and submission to the group, which are
|
||
part of rational culture). But that function does not require belief
|
||
in God after ontological philosophy evolves, because its ontology
|
||
entails, by way of the reproductive global regularities, an
|
||
explanation of the nature of goodness that explains why rational
|
||
subjects ought to be moral. Moral beliefs do not depend on God for
|
||
their justification.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Similarly,
|
||
at the philosophical spiritual stage, religious goals pursued as a
|
||
result of the belief in a transcendent God (as part of
|
||
epistemological philosophy) are necessary truths of theoretical
|
||
reason, because they are a predictable part of its attempt to
|
||
overcome the dichotomy between theoretical and practical reason. But
|
||
ontological philosophy explains the nature of reason in a way that
|
||
entails that dichotomy, and thus, it does not need God to overcome
|
||
the dichotomy of facts and values. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Neither
|
||
belief in God nor religious goals can be predicted by theoretical
|
||
reason alone after ontological philosophy evolves, because they do
|
||
not help maximize the power of reason to control <i>relevant
|
||
conditions</i>. But it is nonetheless possible that its pursuit of
|
||
religious goals is inevitable, because given what ontological reason
|
||
knows about the world, it may realize that there is something that is
|
||
worthy of worship and, thereby, know that it ought to pursue such
|
||
goals. If so, those goals would be good for reason, and the pursuit
|
||
of those goals would be the <i>work </i>of ontological reason in the
|
||
world. That is how the wholeness of the world may include how reason
|
||
<i>makes </i>the world more "whole"it would be otherwise. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Though this
|
||
conclusion of practical reason would depend on what ontological
|
||
philosophy implies about what is, it would be practical reason that
|
||
leads ontological reason to take up this work in the world. To show
|
||
the inevitability of the pursuit of religious goals, we would have to
|
||
follow practical reason to its conclusions, and so practical reason
|
||
could not be reduced to theoretical reason. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">That is the
|
||
sense in which reason is not merely the knower of what is, but also
|
||
an agent that helps determine the future course of evolution. What it
|
||
does would not be not determined in the way that everything is caused
|
||
prior to the evolution of ontological philosophy, but would be an act
|
||
of free will. And it would be a truly creative act. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The pursuit
|
||
of religious goals, if they are pursued by ontological reason, are
|
||
ontologically necessary in the end, and thus, they are indeed a
|
||
necessary aspect of a spatiomaterial world like ours. But the way
|
||
that ontological philosophy knows them is different from all the
|
||
other necessary truths, because this necessary truth cannot be known
|
||
without <i>using </i>practical reason at the ontological stage. But
|
||
once it is known by way of practical reasoning, it is also known by
|
||
theoretical reason. It is part of <i>what is </i>as well as <i>what
|
||
ought to be</i>. It is just that theoretical reason is essentially
|
||
reflective in the end, knowing about its own role as an agent in the
|
||
world. This is, as we shall see, God's knowledge of himself as a
|
||
person.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">In
|
||
order to discover whether reason has such a religious interest,
|
||
therefore, we shall consider all the goals that reason ought to
|
||
pursue in three steps, by considering the three practical interests
|
||
that reason has (or may have) because of the nature of the beings
|
||
that are rational. The first is the <i>individual interest</i>, which
|
||
reason has because of its responsibility for pursuing the good of the
|
||
individual as such. It is usually called “self interest.” The
|
||
second is the <i>spiritual interest</i>, which comes from reason’s
|
||
responsibility for guiding the behavior of the spiritual animal. And
|
||
the third is the <i>religious interest,</i> because that is the
|
||
traditional name for the interest that reason has when it pursues in
|
||
the belief that there is something that is worthy of worship, that
|
||
is, something of such exalted glory that reason ought to revere it
|
||
and serve it, even beyond its own individual and spiritual interest. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">These
|
||
are interests that reason has in addition to its interest, as reason,
|
||
in knowing the good, the true and the beautiful. The latter are
|
||
<i>rational interests</i>, which contribute to the natural perfection
|
||
of culture as a result of cultural evolution by rational selection.
|
||
But the interests to be discussed here are <i>practical interests</i>,
|
||
because they have to do with how reason guides the behavior of the
|
||
beings whose behavior it controls. Which goals rational beings pursue
|
||
depends on what is good <i>for them</i>, and that makes it a matter
|
||
of practical reason. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Ultimately,
|
||
they are all, of course, interests of the individual rational
|
||
subject, if they are interests at all, because the subject, as an
|
||
individual mind, is the ultimate agent of reason in its function of
|
||
guiding behavior. The individual is the being who must ultimately
|
||
judge what is good, true, and beautiful and, indeed, who must
|
||
ultimately do what is good. Thus, they are all forms of <i>"self
|
||
interest</i>," where the Self is understood as the four
|
||
dimensional object that one constructs by how one leads one’s life,
|
||
for they are interests that rational subjects must pursue as part of
|
||
such a life. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">With
|
||
the evolution of ontological philosophy, therefore, reason recognizes
|
||
itself as the inevitable outcome of evolutionary change in a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours. Ontological reason recognizes itself
|
||
as the most powerful being in the world. And reason recognizes itself
|
||
as having the function of doing what is good for rational beings.
|
||
Thus, the main question for practical reason is, “What are those
|
||
goals?” It can be answered by determining what contributes to the
|
||
natural perfection of rational beings. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0; page-break-before: always">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">B<img src="" name="OdlS_1" align="right" hspace="5" width="151" height="52" border="0">y
|
||
“self interest” I mean, in this case, “individual self
|
||
interest,” or the interest that the rational subject has as an
|
||
individual. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><span lang="en-US">Since
|
||
in our terms, the “Self” refers to the life of the rational
|
||
subject, all the practical interests of the rational subject can be
|
||
can be called forms of self interest. Thus, given that the rational
|
||
subject also has a spiritual and religious interest, their
|
||
corresponding names would be her “spiritual self interest” and
|
||
her “religious self interest,” respectively. (See discussion of
|
||
these forms of self interest in </span></font></font></font><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/LoOtkCbGeRRS09Si.htm" target="Lo"><font color="#0000ff"><font face="Arial, sans-serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><span lang="en-US"><u>Change:
|
||
Dichotomies of rational level culture</u></span></font></font></font></a><font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><span lang="en-US">.)</span></font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Individual
|
||
self interest includes, as we have seen, two kinds of goals,
|
||
necessary goals and optional goals. The necessary goals are the goals
|
||
that are good for the individual because they control conditions that
|
||
affect her reproduction as an individual. Optional goals are goals
|
||
that are good for the individual because they are good in some other
|
||
way and the individual chooses to pursue them, making them good for
|
||
herself. These two kinds of goals are good in different ways, and
|
||
since there are correspondingly different reasons why they are what
|
||
ought to exist as far as reason is concerned, let us consider them
|
||
separately. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdlS_2" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="142" height="45" border="0">he
|
||
individual subject is a multicellular animal, and like any animal,
|
||
there are certain conditions that the rational subject must control
|
||
because they affect her reproduction. These are the necessary goals
|
||
of individual self interest. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdlS_3" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="121" height="48" border="0">hey
|
||
include all the goals implicit in animal nature, such as obtaining
|
||
food, shelter and other necessary resources. But they also include
|
||
goals implicit in the nature of the animals that are parts of
|
||
spiritual animal, that is, the social goals, such as maintaining
|
||
family relations, having friends, and other social relations that are
|
||
normal for members of one’s spiritual animal. To a certain extent,
|
||
therefore, they are relative to the technology and style of life that
|
||
prevails in the spiritual animal in which one lives. However, they do
|
||
not include animal goals that are incompatible with being a member of
|
||
a spiritual animal, such as avoiding the risk of losing one's life
|
||
fighting wars, since that is a necessary aspect of the ecological
|
||
niche that individuals occupy </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
|
||
should be kept in mind, however, that necessary goals do not include
|
||
reproduction itself. Reproduction is not one of the conditions that
|
||
affect reproduction, but, rather, what determines which conditions
|
||
are relevant to control, which is the criterion for necessary goals.
|
||
By controlling relevant conditions, the subject is in a position to
|
||
reproduce, if she chooses. But reproduction itself is an optional
|
||
goal (unless, perhaps, reproduction must be controlled because of
|
||
necessary goals pursued by the spiritual animal). Reproduction is
|
||
good for the subject, if she chooses to reproduce, and it brings with
|
||
it all of the other goals that having children entails. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Necessary
|
||
goals are normally picked out by desires that are inherited as part
|
||
of biological nature, which include social goals. From hunger to the
|
||
need for companionship and love, the goal selection system built into
|
||
individual subjects by the biological behavior guidance system guides
|
||
behavior toward goals that control conditions that are relevant in
|
||
the sense of affecting individual reproduction. But what makes the
|
||
goals good is not that they satisfy desire, as hedonism mistakenly
|
||
assumed. Rather, as evolution by reproductive causation implies, they
|
||
satisfy desires because they are good in the sense of contributing to
|
||
one’s maximum holistic power as an organism, that is, of
|
||
contributing to the natural perfection of the individual as an
|
||
organism.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
function of the desires that motivate the pursuit of necessary goals
|
||
is the same as in other animal organisms, namely, that they control
|
||
some condition that must be controlled in order maximize one’s
|
||
power to control relevant conditions over one’s entire reproductive
|
||
cycle. In other words, they contribute to the natural perfection of
|
||
the individual in the same way as the goals pursued by non-rational
|
||
animals. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Even the
|
||
hedonistic rational subject, before ontological philosophy evolves,
|
||
is more powerful than non-rational animals, because when she chooses
|
||
to behave in the current situation in ways that will maximize the
|
||
satisfaction of her desires over her lifetime, she also tends to be
|
||
choosing ways of behaving that control the relevant conditions more
|
||
efficiently and reliably.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">But when
|
||
the rational subject gives up hedonism in favor of a functional
|
||
explanation of desires and recognizes that the control of relevant
|
||
conditions, rather than the desire, is what makes the object of
|
||
desire good, she is even more powerful over her whole life than the
|
||
hedonist. The desires built into the brain as part of its goal
|
||
selection system are a crude indication of the kinds of goals that
|
||
will give the individual the maximum holistic power of an organism.
|
||
She is better able to see the relative importance of such goals and
|
||
how they can be attained as efficiently as possible by considering
|
||
their role in controlling relevant conditions than by the amount of
|
||
pleasure they give. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<img src="" name="OdlS_4" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="121" height="46" border="0"><font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Our
|
||
ontological explanation of the nature of goodness implies, therefore,
|
||
that necessary goals are good for the rational subject as an
|
||
individual because they contribute to her natural perfection as an
|
||
individual organism. And since they are good for the rational
|
||
subject, we infer that the rational subject ought to pursue them.
|
||
That is the form of the argument that will be used to show that goals
|
||
are good for reason in each of the cases below. But it is commonly
|
||
assumed that the difference between facts and values makes any such
|
||
proof impossible, that is, that values cannot be reduced to facts.
|
||
Indeed, there is a famous philosophical argument against this kind of
|
||
explanation of what ought to exist, and it will be answered here,
|
||
though it works the same way for all the goals that determine what
|
||
ought to exist for reason. What is at issue is whether there is a
|
||
naturalistic fallacy. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">I<img src="" name="OdlS_5" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="74" height="34" border="0">t
|
||
seems that there is reason to doubt that this argument about the
|
||
goals that rational subjects ought to pursue is valid. For it can be
|
||
argued that, from the premise that a goal is good for a rational
|
||
subject in the sense of contributing to her natural perfection as an
|
||
individual organism, it does not follow that she ought to pursue it.
|
||
Indeed, the belief that any such implication holds is called the
|
||
“naturalistic fallacy.” </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Ontological
|
||
philosophy does give a naturalistic definition of “good,” because
|
||
it defines “good” as contributing the natural perfection and that
|
||
is a property that can be known by theoretical reason alone in
|
||
explaining the nature of evolution (as reproductive global
|
||
regularities). But according to G. E. Moore, goodness cannot be
|
||
explained naturalistically. Indeed, he would insist that it commits a
|
||
logical fallacy which he called the “naturalistic fallacy.” </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Moore’s
|
||
own positive view is that goodness is a simple, non-natural property
|
||
that supervenes on natural properties (where that means that if one
|
||
thing has it, then anything else with a relevantly similar physical
|
||
nature also has it). Its simplicity keeps goodness from being
|
||
explained in terms of simpler properties, and its non-naturalness is
|
||
supposed to explain its normative meaning, that is, that what has the
|
||
property, goodness, ought to exist. But what is relevant here is the
|
||
problem to which Moore was pointing, which is better known as the
|
||
difference between fact and value. Can values be reduced to facts, or
|
||
is there something inherently irreducible about them. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The most
|
||
compelling argument that G. E. Moore gives for believing that there
|
||
is a naturalistic fallacy is the so-called “open question
|
||
argument.” Moore argues that, given any naturalistic definition of
|
||
“good,” it is possible to ask meaningfully of something that is
|
||
good according to that definition, “But is it good?” For example,
|
||
if “good” is defined as being pleasurable, it makes sense to ask
|
||
of something that is pleasurable,” But is it good?” because it
|
||
might be bad, for example, because of its later consequences or
|
||
because it is morally wrong. It is an open question whether something
|
||
satisfying that naturalistic definition is actually good and ought to
|
||
be chosen. Moore insists that the same holds of any naturalistic
|
||
definition of “good.” If any such naturalistic definition of
|
||
“good” were correct, Moore’s question should be as
|
||
insignificant as asking, “But is the good good?” or “Is the
|
||
good what ought to be chosen?” Thus, the fact that Moore’s
|
||
question can be asked significantly with respect to any naturalistic
|
||
definition of “good” shows that there is a naturalistic fallacy.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">A. J. Ayer
|
||
argued in a similar way against naturalism, albeit is as a logical
|
||
positivist. He argued that if a naturalistic definition of "good"
|
||
were correct, it would be self contradictory to hold that something
|
||
that satisfies the definition is not good. Thus, the fact that no
|
||
such proposition is self contradictory would also suggest that
|
||
naturalism rest on a fallacy. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">However,
|
||
it is not possible to know in advance that Moore’s question will be
|
||
significant with respect to every naturalistic definition of “good.”
|
||
Thus, it can be argued that Moore simply had not tried the right
|
||
naturalistic definition. And that is the way to refute Moore’s open
|
||
question argument without denying its validity as a test for
|
||
fallaciousness. (Likewise for Ayer's way of challenging the truth of
|
||
naturalistic definitions of "good.")</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Let
|
||
us, therefore, apply Moore’s open-question argument to our
|
||
ontological explanation of the nature of goodness. The issue is,
|
||
then, whether it can be asked with significance, Is what contributes
|
||
to natural perfection good? Or since we are talking about what is
|
||
good for reason, the questions is, Is what contributes to the natural
|
||
perfection of a rational being good for that rational being? </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">There is a
|
||
way in which Moore’s question might seem significant, though it is
|
||
not relevant here. It might seem significant, because one does not
|
||
understand what it means to say that something contributes to natural
|
||
perfection. In order to understand the question, it is necessary to
|
||
understand this ontological explanation of the nature of goodness,
|
||
and that means understanding its explanation of the cause of
|
||
evolution and seeing how it involves an inevitable series of stages
|
||
leading up to rational subjects like us. Let us assume, therefore,
|
||
that the question is being asked by someone who understands the
|
||
conclusions of theoretical reason about what is and recognizes
|
||
herself as a rational subject of the kind they entail. That is, let
|
||
us assume that it is being asked by someone at the stage of
|
||
ontological philosophical spirit, that is, by ontological reason. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In that
|
||
case, the answer to Moore’s open-question argument will be that it
|
||
is not significant, at least, not in any way that is relevant to
|
||
showing that some mistake is being made. Let us focus on the case at
|
||
issue, about the goodness of the necessary goals of individual
|
||
interest. The theory implies that such goals are good because they
|
||
contribute in essential way to one’s natural perfection as an
|
||
individual organism. To ask, But are these necessary goals good? is
|
||
to ask whether one has sufficient reason to pursue them. But rational
|
||
subjects do have sufficient reason to pursue goals that are good in
|
||
this sense, because pursuing goals of that kind is part of their
|
||
nature as rational subjects. When the rational subject recognizes
|
||
that she is a being of the kind that comes to exist as a result of
|
||
evolution by reproductive causation, that she is able to ask this
|
||
question about whether she ought to pursue necessary goals because
|
||
she is rational in the way implied by this theory, and (as we shall
|
||
see) that <i>all </i>the goals she already takes to be good as a
|
||
rational being are shown to be good by their contribution to one’s
|
||
natural perfection as a rational subject, it simply does not make
|
||
sense to ask if what contributes to one’s natural perfection is
|
||
good. That is simply what reason does: it pursues the good in that
|
||
sense. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This point
|
||
can also be put from the outside, so to speak, because Moore’s
|
||
question is closed by the ontological explanation of the dichotomy
|
||
between theoretical and practical reason. The difference between
|
||
facts and values is one of the dichotomies among arguments at the
|
||
rational spiritual stage of evolution. Facts are conclusions of
|
||
theoretical reason, and values are conclusions of practical reason.
|
||
Ontological philosophy overcomes this dichotomy, as we have seen, by
|
||
deriving the nature of reason as part of the course of evolution by
|
||
reproductive causation, for that reveals that reason is a behavior
|
||
guidance system that uses knowledge of the true to discover what is
|
||
good. “Good” in that sense is defined as contributing to natural
|
||
perfection, which is a naturalistic definition. But when we recognize
|
||
that we are rational beings in that sense, then that is also what <i>we
|
||
</i>mean by the word, “good.” To ask whether what contributes to
|
||
one’s own natural perfection is good, when one accepts ontological
|
||
philosophy, is as senseless as asking, But is the good good? </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Likewise
|
||
for Ayer's argument against a naturalistic definition of "good."
|
||
For someone with ontological reason, it is self contradictory to deny
|
||
that something that contributes to natural perfection is good, for
|
||
that is what "good" refers to in a spatiomaterial world
|
||
like our own. There simply is no other meaning that "good"
|
||
could have in such a world.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdlS_6" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="74" height="34" border="0">he
|
||
more profound refutation of the naturalistic fallacy is ontological
|
||
philosophy's response to Moore, because its way of closing Moore’s
|
||
open question also provides the kind of wisdom that Socrates was
|
||
seeking in the name of philosophy, as love of wisdom. I am assuming
|
||
that what Socrates was seeking is an explanation of the nature of
|
||
goodness that would make any rational subject who understood it
|
||
virtuous. That is my interpretation of the meaning of the Socratic
|
||
principle: knowledge is virtue. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This is a
|
||
plausible interpretation of Socrates’ argument in the <i>Apology.</i>
|
||
When the oracle at Delphi says that Socrates is the wisest man in
|
||
Athens, Socrates insists that he does not have the kind of wisdom
|
||
that he takes the sophists to be claiming to have when they offer to
|
||
teach virtue for a fee. In order to find out what the oracle meant,
|
||
Socrates explains, he went about cross examining various kinds of
|
||
respected figures in Athens about the nature of wisdom, and he found
|
||
in each case that they did not have the wisdom that they claimed to
|
||
have. How he showed this might be called “Socrates’ open-question
|
||
argument,” because when they explained their wisdom about goodness,
|
||
he was always able to point out that there was some question about
|
||
whether it was really good. In the end, the only wisdom that Socrates
|
||
admits to having is knowing that he does not have knowledge. But in
|
||
the context of the <i>Apology,</i> it is clear that what he means is
|
||
a knowledge about the nature of goodness that would make one
|
||
virtuous, that is, the kind of wisdom that the sophists claimed to
|
||
have by promising to teach virtue. Thus, the merely human wisdom that
|
||
Socrates does have, which he describes by saying that he knows he
|
||
does not have knowledge, can be expressed more positively as
|
||
knowledge about what wisdom is, namely, that it is knowledge about
|
||
the nature of goodness that would make one virtuous. That is the kind
|
||
of wisdom that Socrates takes philosophy to be the love of. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Our way of
|
||
closing Moore’s question is also, therefore, a way of giving
|
||
Socrates the wisdom that he sought as a philosopher, or lover of
|
||
wisdom. It explains not only what is good for the rational subject,
|
||
but it also explains why it is good and, thus, gives the rational
|
||
being a sufficient reason to choose it. The good is <i>what
|
||
</i>contributes to one’s own natural perfection as a rational
|
||
subject, and what makes the good good is <i>that </i>it contributes
|
||
to one’s own natural perfection. The answer that Socrates was
|
||
seeking is the same answer that Moore was denying was possible,
|
||
namely, a self-understanding by reason that reveals how reason is
|
||
related to a kind of perfection that is appropriate to the nature of
|
||
what exists (including himself) in a spatiomaterial world like ours. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, since
|
||
ontological philosophy can explain the goodness of all the goals that
|
||
we believe that rational beings pursue, it succeeds in doing what
|
||
Plato tried to do for Socrates by taking an epistemological approach
|
||
to philosophy. It vindicates Socrates’ merely human wisdom by
|
||
showing that there is, indeed, a kind of goodness the knowledge of
|
||
whose nature would make a rational being virtuous. But instead of
|
||
being The Good Itself (the source of the other Forms in the realm of
|
||
Being, according to Plato) what makes things good is the natural
|
||
perfection that is entailed by progressive evolution, when evolution
|
||
is explained as a global regularity caused ontologically by
|
||
reproductive cycles and space. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">W<img src="" name="OdlS_7" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="74" height="34" border="0">ithin
|
||
this ontological theory, however, let me mention a way in which it
|
||
might seem that Moore’s question is still open and significant (and
|
||
Socrates’ quest is not fulfilled), though it comes from failing to
|
||
recognize the nature of natural perfection. What generally makes
|
||
Moore’s question significant when asked about other naturalistic
|
||
definitions of “good” is that there are always ways that it could
|
||
turn out that something that satisfies the naturalistic definition is
|
||
not good because of some larger context in which it occurs where it
|
||
is bad. That is, I assume, how Socrates was able to cast doubt on the
|
||
wisdom about virtue that other Athenians claimed to have. But that is
|
||
not possible, because of the way in which "good" is defined
|
||
by ontological philosophy, that is, how it explains the nature of
|
||
goodness ontologically. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In the case
|
||
of hedonism, for example, Moore points out that, although defining
|
||
“good” as pleasure seems plausible at first, we discover that the
|
||
definition is faulty when we see that it makes sense to ask, But is
|
||
pleasure good? That question makes sense because we know there are
|
||
situations in which pleasure is bad. (Socrates uses this argument as
|
||
well.) </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">But Moore’s
|
||
question cannot be significant in an analogous way when applied to
|
||
our definition of “good,” because there is no larger context in
|
||
which what contributes to natural perfection can turn out to be bad.
|
||
All the forms of natural perfection fit together as parts of the
|
||
overall structure of natural perfection as a single, spatio-temporal
|
||
whole, and thus, whatever is good by virtue of contributing to some
|
||
form of natural perfection is good by virtue of contributing to the
|
||
natural perfection of the whole. That is the unity of goodness on
|
||
this theory. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is true
|
||
that what is good for one organism can be bad for another, as we have
|
||
seen in the case of the predator and its prey. Eating another animal
|
||
is good for the predator and bad for the prey. But this is not an
|
||
ultimate conflict, because the predator catching the prey is good for
|
||
the ecology, that is, contributes to the natural perfection of the
|
||
ecology (not to mention how it contributes to the natural perfection
|
||
of life or to the natural perfection of change). </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Nor does
|
||
Moore’s question become significant by wondering whether the
|
||
natural perfection within which everything else is good might turn
|
||
out to be bad in a still larger context, like a perfect murder or
|
||
perfect tyranny. The overall structure of natural perfection includes
|
||
spatially a whole planet or, perhaps eventually, a whole planetary
|
||
system, and temporally, the whole course of evolution. Its larger
|
||
context is the rest of the universe, with all its other stars and
|
||
galaxies. But there is nothing about the large scale structure of the
|
||
universe that could possibly make natural perfection bad. What we
|
||
know about the rest of the universe is that evolution will follow the
|
||
same course on any other suitable planet, and that can hardly make
|
||
evolution in our planetary system bad. On the contrary, given the
|
||
vast reaches of space separating planetary systems, the rest of the
|
||
universe seems, at worst, to be indifferent to what happens on any
|
||
one planet (or planetary system). It is meaningless to suggest there
|
||
is some larger context in which natural perfection is bad.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">There
|
||
is, however, a way in which it does make sense to ask, Is what
|
||
contributes to natural perfection good? But it is not a way that
|
||
supports belief in a naturalistic fallacy. One could be asking if
|
||
there isn’t something more to goodness, some further story to be
|
||
told about its nature that is not included in the definition. That
|
||
surely makes sense. What is good by our definition could be good for
|
||
other reasons as well. I suggest something like that below. But what
|
||
is relevant here is that the possibility of such a deeper explanation
|
||
of the nature of goodness does not supply any reason to doubt that
|
||
what contributes to our natural perfection is good. It merely adds to
|
||
the story about why the good, so defined, is good. And far from
|
||
supporting the claim that there is a logical fallacy about defining
|
||
“good” naturalistically, it presupposes the possibility of such a
|
||
naturalistic explanation.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">There
|
||
is, therefore, no naturalistic fallacy. G. E. Moore’s mistake was
|
||
to infer from his own inability to find a naturalistic definition of
|
||
“good” that would close his “open question” to the conclusion
|
||
that there <i>can </i>be none. He promoted his inability to think of
|
||
a naturalistic definition into a logical fallacy. But as we have
|
||
seen, there is a naturalistic property to which “good” might be
|
||
referring that does close his question, at least, if evolution is
|
||
caused by reproduction. (The same holds for Ayer.)</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In fact,
|
||
the nature of the property, goodness, may also explain why Moore saw
|
||
“good” as referring to a simple, non-natural property. Goodness
|
||
may seem to be a simple property, for the goodness of anything
|
||
actually depends on how it is part of a unique kind of structure that
|
||
is as large as the planet, at least. That is why “good” cannot be
|
||
defined by any set of physical properties that characterize the local
|
||
objects, events and conditions that are said to be good.<sup><a class="sdendnoteanc" name="sdendnote1anc" href="#sdendnote1sym"><sup>i</sup></a></sup>
|
||
And goodness seems to be non-natural, since to be good means that it
|
||
ought to exist, and unless one understands the nature of the natural
|
||
perfection in the world and recognizes oneself to be part of it, it
|
||
is hard to see how any naturalistic property could call for things
|
||
that have it to exist. Thus, by closing his open question, not only
|
||
does this view of goodness show, on Moore’s own turf, that there is
|
||
no naturalistic fallacy, but it also explains why Moore takes it to
|
||
be a simple, non-natural property. It seems to be a simple,
|
||
non-natural property because it is actually the most complex, natural
|
||
property. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdlS_8" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="142" height="45" border="0">he
|
||
autonomy of reason, as we have seen, makes the subjects who have the
|
||
power of reason basically different from all other multicellular
|
||
animals. It enables them to do what is good because they believe that
|
||
it is good, and thus, in addition to goals that control conditions
|
||
that affect their own reproduction as individuals, they can pursue
|
||
goals that are good in virtue of contributing to the natural
|
||
perfection of other evolving things or to artificial perfection, such
|
||
as works of art. And since rational subjects will inevitably choose
|
||
to pursue them, we have assumed that such goals are good for the
|
||
rational subject when she chooses to pursue them. That is how we
|
||
introduced the notion of optional goals for rational beings. But now
|
||
that the issue arises for practical reason, it might be asked whether
|
||
rational subjects <i>ought </i>to pursue optional goals. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">R<img src="" name="OdlS_9" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="116" height="48" border="0">eason
|
||
is autonomous, because it is the new, language-based behavior
|
||
guidance system that takes over control of animal behavior as
|
||
primitive spiritual animals evolve into rational spiritual animals.
|
||
The animal desire to submit to the leader’s instructions becomes
|
||
the desire to submit to the conclusions of practical reason, and
|
||
thus, reason wrests control of behavior from (other) animal desires
|
||
(that is, from control by the goal selection system of the
|
||
multicellular animal behavior guidance system). That is, as we have
|
||
seen, what makes it possible for the rational subject to puruse what
|
||
she believes are necessary goals of individual self interest, even
|
||
when it is opposed by strong immediate desires. But since reason
|
||
works by enabling the subject to intend and actually do what she
|
||
<i>believes </i>is good, it also enables her to pursue goals beyond
|
||
those that control conditions that affect her individual
|
||
reproduction, or optional goals.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Optional
|
||
goals include all goals that are good for other reproducing
|
||
structures, the ecology, life, or change because of how they
|
||
contribute to their natural perfection, as well as what is good in
|
||
virtue of contributing to artificial perfection. They include, for
|
||
example, doing good for other individual rational beings (beyond what
|
||
is required by morality, that is, as supererogation), making
|
||
contributions to culture (beyond the normal rational interest in
|
||
knowing the good, the true and the beautiful), serving the interest
|
||
of one’s spiritual animal (beyond duty), doing good for other
|
||
spiritual animals, for the ecology, for life, or for evolution
|
||
generally. And optional goals include creating or enjoying works of
|
||
art, including not only works of fine art, but also the aesthetic
|
||
aspect of one’s daily life.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is good
|
||
to pursue optional goals, however, only insofar as necessary goals
|
||
are already being attained. Necessary goals take priority over
|
||
optional goals. But the power of reason is so great that rational
|
||
beings are often in situations where they are able to control more
|
||
conditions in the world than what affects their individual
|
||
reproduction, and they spend their extra rational action on optional
|
||
goals. The choice of such goals is what makes them good for the
|
||
rational subject. But as rational subjects, they cannot choose to
|
||
pursue any goal unless they believe (correctly or mistakenly) that it
|
||
is already good in some way, that is, by contributing to the natural
|
||
or artificial perfection of something. The autonomy of reason is the
|
||
power to do what they believe is good, not the power to act
|
||
arbitrarily or capriciously. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
natural (or artificial) perfection of other things in the world is
|
||
often something that rational subjects can detect, because rational
|
||
imagination enables rational subjects to see the actual against the
|
||
background of the possible and that can reveal ways in which the
|
||
whole is an optimal part-whole relation. The rational interest in
|
||
beauty is also what enables rational subjects to see how best to
|
||
control all the conditions that affect their individual reproduction,
|
||
not to mention what enables them to judge what is true. It plays the
|
||
same role in the choice of optional goals and pursuing them.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">When a
|
||
rational subject pursues an optional goal, she is guided by the
|
||
perception of what is good for something other than herself, that is,
|
||
by her perception of how it contributes to some other natural
|
||
perfection. The judgment of what it is good to do is disinterested,
|
||
because it depends of her belief about what is good for it. This is
|
||
true even in the case of a work of art. What is good for the work of
|
||
art is not what contributes to the natural perfection of something
|
||
that is already evolving, because it does not even exist until the
|
||
artist chooses to create it. But it does have an optimal part-whole
|
||
relation, which is called beauty, and thus, it is like natural
|
||
perfection and recognized by rational imagination in the same way.
|
||
Artists testify that, as the work of art grows, it “calls for”
|
||
certain additions so that the artist is merely ministering to its
|
||
needs. That is the sense in which works of art imitate nature: the
|
||
beauty of art is the imitation of the natural perfection found in
|
||
nature. It is artificial perfection.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">To
|
||
say that rational subjects can choose to do what is good because they
|
||
believe that it is good, even when it does not control relevant
|
||
conditions, is not to deny that they may also have a desire to pursue
|
||
that goal. It is only to say that the desire to pursue the goal is
|
||
not what makes it good. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Desire may
|
||
prompt the choice of one optional goal over another, for example,
|
||
when the desire to listen to music leads one to become a musician or
|
||
even just to listen to music. But that is not what makes the goal
|
||
good. What makes it good is that what one is listening to or adding
|
||
to the whole makes an essential contribution to the optimal
|
||
part-whole relation of the work of art itself. Likewise, a benevolent
|
||
desire may prompt her to take an interest in the good of someone
|
||
else, but what makes the rational subject’s actions in pursuit of
|
||
it good is not how it satisfies that benevolent desire, but how it
|
||
contributes to the other’s natural perfection and, by doing so,
|
||
contributes to her own natural perfection. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Moreover,
|
||
once one has chosen music, say, as an optional goal, the desire that
|
||
is the source of the enjoyment one gets from pursuing it is not
|
||
merely the desire that prompted the choice in the first place. What
|
||
the rational subject learns about its natural perfection in pursuing
|
||
the optional goal transforms that desire. Not only does she come to
|
||
enjoy new aspects of music, or whatever the object, but she also
|
||
enjoys them for other reasons, having to do with how they contribute
|
||
to the natural perfection of the whole. The desire that is being
|
||
satisfied is ultimately the desire to submit to reason, though given
|
||
how reason grows and matures with the rational pursuit of optional
|
||
goals, it might be better called the desire to enjoy the power of
|
||
reason. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is the
|
||
nature of rational imagination that leads us, as we have seen, to
|
||
appreciate aesthetic goodness. The perception of beauty is implicitly
|
||
the recognition of perfection, and that is what accounts for our
|
||
response to it. In perceiving that nothing can be done to make it
|
||
better, reason would have us leave it as it is and simply enjoy it. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">However,
|
||
if goals are not good because they satisfy desire, but rather because
|
||
of the relevant conditions they control, as our ontological
|
||
explanation of goodness and our functional explanation of desire
|
||
imply, one might doubt that optional goals are good at all. Since
|
||
they do not control conditions that affect the rational subjects
|
||
reproduction as an individual, what makes them good?</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is clear
|
||
that optional goals are not good for rational subjects in the same
|
||
way that the goals of behavior in other multicellular animals are
|
||
good for them, because the attainment of optional goals does not
|
||
control “relevant conditions” in the sense of conditions that
|
||
affect the rational subject’s reproduction as an individual.
|
||
Controlling them does not necessarily make the individual better able
|
||
to reproduce. Thus, ontological philosophy cannot explain why
|
||
optional goals are good for the individual in exactly the same way as
|
||
it does necessary goals.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">O<a href="#10"><img src="" name="OdlS_10" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="115" height="46" border="0"></a>ntological
|
||
philosophy does, however, imply that it is good for rational beings
|
||
to pursue optional goals, because it explains the nature of goodness
|
||
as contributing to natural perfection, not necessarily as
|
||
contributing to its own maximum power to control conditions that
|
||
affect its own reproduction. The latter is merely how the power to
|
||
contribute to natural perfection is usually brought into being in a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The power
|
||
of reason makes rational subjects essentially different from other
|
||
multicellular animals, indeed, from all other organisms (except
|
||
spiritual animals), and that means that their natural perfection is
|
||
different from other animals. Though other organisms can only evolve
|
||
behavior (and other structural effects) that control conditions that
|
||
affect their own reproduction, that limitation is lifted in the case
|
||
of rational beings, because reason guides behavior as a result of a
|
||
cultural evolution of arguments that discover the true, the good and
|
||
the beautiful. It is a behavior guidance system that is able to tell
|
||
what is good more generally than by pursuing goals dictated by the
|
||
biological behavior guidance system and what can evolve biologically
|
||
by natural selection. It enables rational subjects to do what is good
|
||
simply because they believe that it is good. Furthermore, since
|
||
reason often gives rational beings more power than they need to
|
||
control relevant conditions, the natural perfection of rational
|
||
beings is not just the maximum power to control all conditions that
|
||
affect individual reproduction. It is the maximum power to control
|
||
conditions generally that are good.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In other
|
||
words, the fact that a power to contribute to natural perfection does
|
||
not evolve by making the organism better able to complete its own
|
||
reproductive cycle does not imply that it is not good. Reproductive
|
||
causation is merely what is usually responsible for the existence of
|
||
such powers in the world. And if at later stakes in evolution,
|
||
organisms acquire powers of that kind without being naturally
|
||
selected for having them, that does not mean that they are not good.
|
||
Given the nature of goodness, any contribution to the natural
|
||
perfection of the whole of which something is part is good,
|
||
regardless how it comes to exist in the world. That is something that
|
||
reason enables the rational subject to recognize, though that is not
|
||
why reason evolved in the first place. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Perfection
|
||
is an optimal part-whole relation in which the whole does the most
|
||
with the least, and in the case of natural perfection, it is an
|
||
optimal part-whole relation in which the whole has as much power to
|
||
use free energy to control what happens in the world with the fewest
|
||
and simplest structural causes as possible. In the case of reason,
|
||
the structural causes are the sources of rational action, that is,
|
||
the use of practical arguments to guide one’s behavior toward the
|
||
good. Thus, the optimum cannot be a matter of using the fewest and
|
||
simplest structural causes to attain some given ends, for there is a
|
||
fixed supply of structural causes, namely, all the behavior of a
|
||
rational subject over her lifetime. In this case, the part-whole
|
||
relation does more with less by using the structural causes already
|
||
available to do more, that is, to control more of what happens in the
|
||
world. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Nor is
|
||
there any question about what counts as more or less control of what
|
||
happens in the world, because optional goals are goals that control
|
||
conditions that contribute to natural (or artificial) perfection in
|
||
some way or other. Though they may not control conditions that affect
|
||
one’s own reproduction, optional goals are not arbitrary or random
|
||
changes in the world. They are not chosen by reason unless they are
|
||
seen as contributing to the natural perfection of some other
|
||
organism, to some other form of natural perfection, such as the
|
||
ecology or evolution, or to an artificial perfection that imitates
|
||
natural perfection, such as works of art. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, the
|
||
natural perfection of rational beings is more like the natural
|
||
perfection of life than the natural perfection of organisms. New
|
||
levels of part-whole complexity in the structures of reproducing
|
||
organisms contribute to the natural perfection of life not because
|
||
they control conditions that are already relevant to reproduction,
|
||
but rather because their higher level of organization makes new
|
||
conditions relevant and brings new conditions under control,
|
||
extending the power of life as such to control what happens in the
|
||
world. Likewise, what contributes to the natural perfection of reason
|
||
is what increases the power to control what happens in the world, not
|
||
to control conditions that are relevant to its own reproduction. In
|
||
both cases, however, the new conditions brought under control are not
|
||
arbitrary, but are good because they contribute to natural (or
|
||
artificial) perfection in some way. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Rational
|
||
subjects ought, therefore, to choose optional goals and pursue them.
|
||
Though the optional goals themselves are not necessary, it is a
|
||
necessary goal of rational subjects to pursue some optional goals or
|
||
others, if they have the extra power to do so. It contributes to
|
||
their natural perfection as rational subjects, even though those
|
||
goals do not control conditions that are relevant to their own
|
||
reproduction. The pursuit of optional goals is, therefore, good for
|
||
rational subjects. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, it is
|
||
possible for ontological philosophy to answer G. E. Moore’s doubts
|
||
about the possibility of any such naturalistic explanation of the
|
||
goodness of optional goals in the same way as it did necessary goals.
|
||
To a rational subject who understands her nature as a rational
|
||
subject and her place in the natural world, it simply does not make
|
||
sense to ask, But is contributing to one’s own natural perfection
|
||
good?</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
pursuit of optional goals is also part of the wisdom that Socrates
|
||
was seeking, because this ontological explanation of the nature of
|
||
goodness explains why optional goals are good for the rational
|
||
subject. And the pursuit of any optional goal that one has chosen is
|
||
good, because the pursuit of optional goals is good for rational
|
||
beings and this goal is the one that the rational subject has chosen.
|
||
</font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0; page-break-before: always">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">R<img src="" name="OdmE_1" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="117" height="52" border="0">eason
|
||
has another practical interest, in addition to the individual
|
||
interest of each subject, because it also has the function of guiding
|
||
the behavior of the spiritual animal as a whole. The goals of the
|
||
spiritual animal are good for rational beings in the same way as the
|
||
goals of individual rational subjects, and there is also a difference
|
||
in the goals pursued by spiritual animals between necessary and
|
||
optional goals. But since all these goals, necessary and optional for
|
||
both individual subjects and spiritual animals, are goals pursued by
|
||
rational subjects according to arguments that evolve by rational
|
||
selection, there must be priorities among them. Those priorities are
|
||
set by rules of morality and rules of justice, and both sets of rules
|
||
are good for reason in the same way, that is, by contributing to the
|
||
natural perfection of reason. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">W<img src="" name="OdmE_2" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="105" height="43" border="0">hat
|
||
is good for spiritual animals is not necessarily the same as what is
|
||
good for rational subjects, because spiritual animals evolve by
|
||
reproductive causation on the social level of biological organization
|
||
at the same time that rational subjects evolve by reproductive
|
||
causation on the individual (or multicellular) level of biological
|
||
organization. Though they depend on one another for their existence,
|
||
each approaches the natural perfection for organisms of its own kind.
|
||
At the same time that spiritual animal are becoming naturally perfect
|
||
as social level animals made of rational subjects as parts, rational
|
||
subjects become naturally perfect as multicellular level animals that
|
||
live as parts of spiritual animals. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">As
|
||
a higher level of biological organization, spiritual animals depend
|
||
for their existence on the coordination of rational subjects as lower
|
||
level organisms. But the part-whole relation that holds between the
|
||
spiritual animal and its members is, as we have seen, different from
|
||
that between the multicellular animal and the cells that are it
|
||
parts. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In both
|
||
cases, what is good for the whole is usually good for the parts
|
||
(because they are parts of the whole), but it can sometimes be bad
|
||
for the parts as well. For example, the good of the whole sometimes
|
||
requires the sacrifice of some of its parts. In spiritual animals,
|
||
this happens in warfare, when some individuals must die, and in
|
||
multicellular animals, the death of cells is a normal part of the
|
||
process of development, for example, in the nervous system. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">But there
|
||
is a difference in how the good for the parts is related to the good
|
||
of the whole. In both cases, it is generally true that what is good
|
||
for the parts is also good for the whole, because the whole is made
|
||
up of the parts and depends on them for its own existence. Indeed, in
|
||
multicellular animals, what is good for the cell is never bad for the
|
||
whole, because the only way that goals can be naturally selected for
|
||
a cell is by the success of the multicellular whole in reproducing,
|
||
that is, by natural selection at the higher level of biological
|
||
organization. The cells cannot complete reproductive cycles on their
|
||
own, independently of the multicellular reproductive cycle. In
|
||
spiritual animals, however, what is good for the rational subject may
|
||
be bad for the spiritual animal of which it is part, because its
|
||
goals are naturally selected for the rational subject by how they
|
||
contribute to individual reproduction, not just the reproduction of
|
||
the spiritual animal as a whole. That is, individuals do reproduce
|
||
independently of the reproduction of their spiritual animal. Thus,
|
||
for example, some of the goals that rational subjects pursue because
|
||
they contribute to their individual interest may be immoral or
|
||
treacherous and, thus, harmful to the spiritual animal. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Instead
|
||
of subordinating the good of the part to the good of the whole,
|
||
therefore, the good for the individual and the good for spiritual
|
||
animal are on a par. They are good for the same kinds of reasons,
|
||
though on different levels of biological organization. And they are
|
||
both good for the rational subject, for he is the agent of rational
|
||
beings generally (that is, for the individual, the spiritual animal,
|
||
and as we shall see, even for the world as a whole). Thus, individual
|
||
and spiritual goals are both goals of the self, as the
|
||
four-dimensional being that one constructs by his rational actions
|
||
over a lifetime, and conflicts between individual and spiritual self
|
||
interest must be resolved, or else reason will not be able to serve
|
||
its function. They are resolved, as we shall see, by a symmetrical
|
||
subordination of the good of each for the good of the other. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Spiritual
|
||
animals pursue goals by way of institutions that generate social
|
||
level behavior. (Institutions are patterns of interaction among
|
||
members guided by low-level practical arguments about social roles
|
||
and their duties, prerogatives and interrelationships, and their
|
||
functions are the social level behavior they generate.) When choices
|
||
must be made among social level goals, it is the function of
|
||
political institutions, or government, to make the choice for the
|
||
spiritual animal. And parallel to rational subjects, there is a
|
||
difference between goals that are necessary and goals that are
|
||
optional. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">S<img src="" name="OdmE_3" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="89" height="44" border="0">piritual
|
||
animals have necessary goals. Goals that control conditions that
|
||
affect the reproduction of the spiritual animal as a whole are
|
||
necessary goals. Though spiritual animals, unlike multicellular
|
||
animals, can continue to exist indefinitely without reproducing,
|
||
there are nonetheless relevant conditions to be controlled. They must
|
||
be <i>able </i>to reproduce, if the occasion arises, in order to be
|
||
naturally perfect. Though reproduction is not a necessary goal of
|
||
spiritual animals, it is the criterion of which other goals are
|
||
necessary. And among their necessary goals, two kinds can be
|
||
distinguished, because the social level behavior in pursuit of goals
|
||
can be directed either at objects external to the spiritual animal or
|
||
at its own members. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">E<img src="" name="OdmE_4" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="74" height="34" border="0">xternal
|
||
necessary goals of spiritual animals are analogous to those of
|
||
multicellular animals, except for warfare, the new kind of behavior
|
||
that spiritual animals have toward one another. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Like
|
||
multicellular animals, spiritual animals must acquire from nature the
|
||
free energy and other resources they need to fuel their reproductive
|
||
cycles (This aspect of the economic institution corresponds to
|
||
feeding in other animals.) Spiritual animals must also protect
|
||
themselves from natural hazards such as predators, storms and other
|
||
disasters. And just as multicellular animals must mate, nomadic
|
||
spiritual animals, at least, must maintain relations to other
|
||
spiritual animals (such as membership in tribes) by which its members
|
||
can mate outside their own spiritual animal. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
non-analogous goals arise from group-level natural selection of
|
||
spiritual animals by war. The overriding goal of a spiritual animal
|
||
in dealing with other spiritual animals is to wining at war with
|
||
them, which involves making the best choice about whether (and how)
|
||
to live peacefully or to engage in war relative to other spiritual
|
||
animals with which it interacts. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">I<img src="" name="OdmE_5" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="76" height="36" border="0">nternal
|
||
goals of animal behavior are unique to spiritual animals, because in
|
||
spiritual animals, the animal behavior guidance system also serves as
|
||
the biological behavior guidance system, that is, as the mechanism
|
||
that coordinates the behavior of the lower level organisms of which
|
||
it is composed. Thus, social level animal behavior must serve many of
|
||
the same functions as the biological behavior guidance system in
|
||
multicellular animals. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
economic institution also includes internal functions, such as
|
||
coordinating the productive behavior of members and distributing the
|
||
products, just as acquiring energy requires digestion and circulation
|
||
in multicellular animals. Likewise, the government includes executive
|
||
institutions that administer regulations, just as the brain has
|
||
nervous connections to the rest of the body. But it also includes an
|
||
institution for enforcing laws by punishment, which is analogous to
|
||
the immune system in multicellular animals. The kinship system gives
|
||
individuals locations in the spiritual body, corresponding to a
|
||
process of embryological development for determining cells to certain
|
||
parts of the body. Educational and religious institutions acculturate
|
||
the members to the arguments that will guide their behavior, just as
|
||
the endocrine system and parasympathetic nervous system guide the
|
||
behavior of individual cells. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Some goals
|
||
of internal behavior have no analogue in multicellular animals. For
|
||
example, spiritual animals may have institutions that mediate the
|
||
exchange of arguments and promote cultural evolution, such as
|
||
academic, scholarly, and research institutions. Nothing like cultural
|
||
evolution takes place in multicellular animals. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Some
|
||
internal goals of social level behavior are especially relevant to
|
||
practical reason because they have to do with controlling the pursuit
|
||
of individual goals. The health of the spiritual animal requires that
|
||
its members observe moral rules that limit the pursuit of the
|
||
individual interests, for unless they are observed, members will not
|
||
be willing and able to cooperate in generating social level behavior.
|
||
</font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The content
|
||
of moral rules is determined as the conclusions of practical
|
||
arguments about how individuals should behave in situations that
|
||
affect others or the spiritual animal as a whole. As we have seen,
|
||
they include rules that require everyone to cooperate in generating
|
||
social level behavior (including prohibition of treason and other
|
||
crimes against the spiritual animal).They also include rules that
|
||
prevent members from harming one another, rules that enable members
|
||
to cooperate with one another (such as the duty of fidelity in
|
||
promises and contracts) and facilitate cooperative attitudes (such as
|
||
the duty of reciprocity in gift giving and civility. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Because
|
||
practical arguments evolve when they are rationally selected by
|
||
everyone, as we have seen, the rules tend to be the rules that
|
||
maximize the good of the whole (as the utilitarians hold), that
|
||
maximize the freedom of everyone (that is, minimize the limits they
|
||
impose on the pursuit of individual goals, as the contractarians
|
||
hold), and treat members equally (as Kantians insist). </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
spiritual animal must act as a whole on its members to ensure that
|
||
moral rules are followed. Violations of moral rules arouse anger in
|
||
those who are hurt, and the motives selected for fighting wars tend
|
||
to take the form of revenge and vendettas within spiritual animals,
|
||
unless measures are taken to restore the moral equilibrium. The
|
||
institutions that have traditionally served this function are the
|
||
religious institutions, which publicly affirm and defend the
|
||
principles on which other practical arguments are based, and the
|
||
justice system (including the police and judicial system), which
|
||
punish wrongdoing. (The former is part of the educational systems,
|
||
analogous to the endocrine and parasympathetic nervous system in
|
||
multicellular animals, whereas the justice system corresponds to the
|
||
immune system, which kills mis-functioning cells in the body as well
|
||
as invaders.) </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Though many
|
||
violations of moral rules are naturally sanctioned by the disapproval
|
||
of other members, some violations of moral rules are so harmful and
|
||
cause so much warlike antagonism that they are prohibited by laws,
|
||
and retributive justice is reserved for them. Punishment of crime is
|
||
a necessary goal of spiritual animals, if only because taking revenge
|
||
on the individual level leads to civil war. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><img src="" name="FunctAnalogy" align="bottom" width="460" height="330" border="0"></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Rational
|
||
subjects, therefore, insofar as they are responsible for selecting
|
||
and generating social level behavior, ought to choose to pursue these
|
||
goals. The attainment of these goals contributes to the natural
|
||
perfection of the spiritual animal, because it controls the
|
||
conditions that affect its reproduction as a whole. These goals are,
|
||
therefore, good for reason in its function of guiding the behavior of
|
||
the spiritual animal. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In response
|
||
to Moore’s open question argument, therefore, it will not make
|
||
sense for rational beings who understand the nature of reason and its
|
||
place in the natural world to ask, But is what contributes to the
|
||
natural perfection of spiritual animals good? </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The pursuit
|
||
of these necessary goals is also part of the wisdom that Socrates was
|
||
seeking, because this ontological explanation of the nature of
|
||
goodness explains why necessary goals are good for the spiritual
|
||
animal. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdmE_6" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="89" height="44" border="0">here
|
||
are optional goals of spiritual interest. Just as individuals can
|
||
pursue goals because they are good even when they do not control
|
||
conditions that affect individual reproduction, so spiritual animals
|
||
can pursue goals that are good when they do not control conditions
|
||
that affect its social level reproduction. Though in both cases the
|
||
goal must already be good in some way (by contributing to the natural
|
||
perfection of something, including artifacts), the goal becomes good
|
||
for reason because it is chosen.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">For
|
||
the spiritual animal to pursue optional goals, a general consensus
|
||
about them is normally required, because they are not necessary and
|
||
pursuing them will involve the cost of generating social level
|
||
behavior. But since there are goals that it would be good for
|
||
spiritual animals to pursue, it is possible to make them good for
|
||
spiritual animals by choosing them.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Though it
|
||
is a necessary goal of spiritual animals to protect the environment
|
||
from the damage of its own economic activity enough to survive
|
||
indefinitely into the future, an optional goal might be to preserve
|
||
as many species and ancient ecologies as possible in order to insure
|
||
the diversity of life on earth.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is a
|
||
necessary goal of spiritual animals to make sure that they will win
|
||
any wars they may fight, since that is a condition that affects their
|
||
reproduction as a whole. But an optional goal would be to work
|
||
together with other spiritual animals to end group level natural
|
||
selection by war. That would require the control of population growth
|
||
everywhere on the planet, including perhaps even decreasing it, since
|
||
that is the basic cause of war and would eventually lead to war,
|
||
unless it is controlled. Under such conditions it might be possible
|
||
for spiritual animals to end war by cooperating in an international
|
||
military force to protect national boundaries and prevent spiritual
|
||
animals from harming one another. (Insofar as there are traits that
|
||
spiritual animals would otherwise evolve by such group level natural
|
||
selection which make them more perfect, it might also be necessary
|
||
for spiritual animals to assume responsibility for giving spiritual
|
||
animals those powers by other means.) </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Natural
|
||
selection at the individual level continues after a fashion within
|
||
spiritual animals by success in individual reproduction, but it is
|
||
significantly curtailed by modern medicine and where it is still at
|
||
work, it involves much suffering. Thus, an optional goal for
|
||
spiritual animals would be to replace natural selection with germ
|
||
line intervention in order to eliminate genetic diseases and to
|
||
enhance the powers that enable rational subjects to attain the goals
|
||
they ought to pursue. For example, each couple could be given the
|
||
option of adding or deleting certain genes from their offspring, and
|
||
since they would choose what is best for their children, it would be
|
||
decentralized process much like natural selection in which rational
|
||
subjects could be expected to evolve further in the direction of
|
||
natural perfection for organisms of their kind. It would be to
|
||
replace natural selection at the individual level with rational
|
||
selection. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Traditional
|
||
optional goals have included building monuments. But a more up to
|
||
date goal that may be optional for spiritual animals is space
|
||
exploration and colonizing the rest of the planetary system. But
|
||
there are other possible goals. In each case, it is not clear at this
|
||
point in evolution whether these goals are optional or necessary.
|
||
That is why the future course of evolution is not just a conclusion
|
||
of theoretical reason, but with the evolution of reason’s
|
||
ontological self-understanding, depends on where practical reasoning
|
||
leads reason in the situations that arise.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdmE_7" align="right" hspace="5" width="153" height="66" border="0">he
|
||
pursuit of goals of the spiritual animal may conflict with the
|
||
rational subject’s pursuit of individual goals, and since they are
|
||
both goals of rational beings, there is a conflict among goals that
|
||
needs to be resolved. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
individual interest and the spiritual interest are equal, because
|
||
they are good in parallel ways, that is, each by contributing to the
|
||
natural perfection of the organism (or primary structure) on its own
|
||
level of biological organization, and ontological philosophy provides
|
||
no grounds for preferring one over the other. Both are equally the
|
||
responsibility of reason, or goals pursued by reflective subjects as
|
||
the agents of reason, and thus, it is a conflict between one's
|
||
individual self interest and one's spiritual self interest. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">When
|
||
individual and spiritual goals conflict, what ought to exist for
|
||
reason is what contributes to the natural perfection of reason as the
|
||
behavior guidance system for both biological levels, that is, for the
|
||
rational subject as a rational being. But what are those priorities. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">M<img src="" name="OdmE_8" align="right" hspace="5" width="133" height="83" border="0">oral
|
||
rules are generally assumed to take priority over the pursuit of
|
||
individual goals. Indeed, that is their function: moral rules are
|
||
meant to limit the pursuit of individual self interest. The general
|
||
observance of moral rules is, as we have seen, a necessary goal of
|
||
spiritual animals, for spiritual animals cannot pursue social level
|
||
goals except by coordinating the behavior of its members and their
|
||
ability to cooperate in pursuit of such goals depends on the members
|
||
being moral in their relations to one another. But when moral rules
|
||
do conflict with the pursuit of individual self interest, why should
|
||
the rational subject be moral? </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Let
|
||
us recall the answers to this question at earlier points in
|
||
evolution. Answers at the stage of rational spiritual animals are
|
||
based on religion, but the answers given by epistemological
|
||
philosophy are no more adequate. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Rational
|
||
culture evolves arguments to justify the principles on which its
|
||
practical arguments are based, and they generally have to do with
|
||
explanations of the origin of the world, the place of rational beings
|
||
in it, and the purpose in their existence. These arguments serve the
|
||
function of mutually acknowledging the validity of the culture of
|
||
one’s spiritual animal, but they are not rationally compelling.
|
||
Religious beliefs are typically about gods or superior beings of some
|
||
kind, which may be interpreted as representations of the spiritual
|
||
animal and its interest. But in order to justify being moral, rather
|
||
than pursuing their individual interest (or acting on emotion), they
|
||
merely assert the priority of spiritual interest over individual
|
||
interest. Though it may be obvious that being moral is in the
|
||
spiritual interest, that is, good for the group as a whole, religion
|
||
does not explain why the spiritual interest is prior to the
|
||
individual interest. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Philosophical
|
||
culture has attempted to give a deeper justification of moral rules.
|
||
In the ancient and medieval period and continuing long into the
|
||
modern period, the belief was that the reason for being moral, as
|
||
well as the content of moral rules, has to do with something about
|
||
the nature of goodness and, thus, is objective. Plato thought that
|
||
the nature of goodness is explained by the existence of The Good
|
||
Itself as the source of the other Forms — and, thus, of the
|
||
goodness of visible objects that participate in the Forms as well.
|
||
That was meant to explain why rational subjects ought to be moral in
|
||
a way that would satisfy Socrates, that is, by making rational
|
||
subjects virtuous. But Plato could never explain the nature of The
|
||
Good Itself in a way that showed how it made other Forms good, much
|
||
less why rational subjects should be moral.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It was
|
||
possible to preserve Plato’s belief in the objective nature of
|
||
goodness in the medieval period (and the early modern period) despite
|
||
the inability to give an adequate explanation of the nature of
|
||
goodness. The Christian view, in its most mature form, holds that it
|
||
is God who understands the nature of goodness, whereas finite
|
||
rational beings like us cannot. That is, God's ultimate purposes are
|
||
said to be inscrutable. Insofar as we do not understand why we ought
|
||
to be moral, therefore, we must so as a matter of faith. Though it is
|
||
a faith that there is something about the nature of goodness from a
|
||
God’s Eye point of view that makes morality prior to individual
|
||
interest, it is still not reason that explains why we ought to be
|
||
moral. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In the
|
||
modern period, attempts to give a naturalistic explanation of the
|
||
goodness of morality that would explain why we ought to be moral were
|
||
ultimately failures. Hobbes, as a social contractarian, attempted to
|
||
explain the content of moral rules as the result of a contract in
|
||
which every rational subject gives up only as much freedom as is
|
||
required to protect individuals generally from harming one another
|
||
and enabling them to cooperate. But since that did not explain why
|
||
the individual should not be immoral in pursuing his individual
|
||
interest after the social contrast was signed and he could avoid
|
||
being punished, it did not explain adequately why the morally good is
|
||
good. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Kant
|
||
attempted to explain the content of moral rules as what is required
|
||
by universalizability, that is, his categorical imperative (that we
|
||
should act only on those maxims that we can will to be a universal
|
||
law of nature). But that left Kant with no way to show that
|
||
individuals ought to be moral, because it did not give the individual
|
||
any reason for choosing not to be rational in that sense, and being
|
||
rational only in the sense of pursuing is rational individual
|
||
interest. Kant suggested that the reason stems from something
|
||
uniquely valuable about rational subjects, that is, as ends in
|
||
themselves, but he was never able to explain what that was, except to
|
||
suggest that is has something to do with the unknown (noumenal)
|
||
nature of rational subjects and to suggest that freedom from pursuing
|
||
goals set by one’s desires, or what he called “autonomy,” is
|
||
somehow better. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Utilitarians,
|
||
such as Bentham and Mill, explained the content of moral rules as
|
||
what promotes the general happiness, but they too failed to explain
|
||
why the rational subject should be moral. They assumed that the
|
||
individual subject cannot help but pursue his individual happiness,
|
||
but they were never able to explain why the individual should prefer
|
||
the general happiness to his own happiness when they came into
|
||
conflict. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Ontological
|
||
philosophy does, however, explain why we should be moral. Its
|
||
explanation of the nature of rational beings and the nature of
|
||
goodness explains not only the content of moral rules, as we have
|
||
seen, but also why the individual rational subject should take moral
|
||
rules as prior to individual interest. The foundation of the priority
|
||
of moral rules is that the spiritual interest is one of the basic
|
||
interests of the rational subject. Because of the nature of reason
|
||
and the way in which it works, the individual has, as a rational
|
||
being, responsibility for guiding the behavior of the spiritual
|
||
animal as well as his own individual behavior. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Reason
|
||
evolved originally, as we have seen, with the function of guiding the
|
||
behavior of spiritual animals to make reliable choices about war and
|
||
peace. But since it works by the exchange of practical arguments
|
||
among members and their rational selection by individual rational
|
||
subjects (that is, the selection of arguments from among the
|
||
alternatives that make their world views maximally coherent), it
|
||
could also be used to guide individual behavior. In the case of
|
||
guiding the behavior of the spiritual animal, however, not only the
|
||
discovery of what is good, but also the selection and generation of
|
||
social level behavior depends on the members coming to agree about
|
||
what the spiritual animal ought to do (though, in practice, social
|
||
level behavior may be guided by political institutions that are
|
||
maintained by mutual agreement about the practical arguments that
|
||
generate them). Given the way that reason functions as a behavior
|
||
guidance system for the spiritual animal, therefore, the rational
|
||
subject has, as a rational being, an interest in pursuing the goals
|
||
of the spiritual animal. The rational subject is responsible for
|
||
social level behavior and they contribute to the natural perfection
|
||
of the whole of which he is part. And being moral is the most basic
|
||
way that the individual contributes to the natural perfection of his
|
||
spiritual animal.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It should
|
||
be emphasized that the spiritual interest of the rational subject is
|
||
different from his individual self interest in the spiritual animal
|
||
because of how he depends on it as the means to pursuing his
|
||
individual goals. First of all, the spiritual animal is the whole of
|
||
which he is part, the context of all his activity, and thus, his
|
||
welfare depends on its welfare. But furthermore, most of the goals he
|
||
pursues depend on having the use of a spiritual body, as well as a
|
||
physical body (in the sense that the means involve the cooperation of
|
||
other members of his spiritual animal). Since his spiritual body is a
|
||
most powerful means to attaining goals that are good for him as an
|
||
individual, the individual has another interest in the good of the
|
||
spiritual animal. But this is not his spiritual self interest. It is
|
||
his individual self interest in his spiritual animal as the whole of
|
||
which he is part and his individual self interest in having the use
|
||
of a spiritual body.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, the
|
||
subject has necessarily, as a rational being, a spiritual self
|
||
interest distinct from his individual self interest. And being moral
|
||
is in his spiritual interest. But it may seem that it is not possible
|
||
for ontological philosophy to explain why the rational subject ought
|
||
to be moral, because when moral rules require limiting the pursuit of
|
||
individual goals, there is a conflict between his two basic
|
||
interests. They are equal interests, according to ontological
|
||
philosophy, because they both arise in the same way (by contributing
|
||
to the natural perfection of the organism on its level of biological
|
||
organization) and the rational subject is responsible for both. They
|
||
do come into conflict, because moral rules are meant to limit the
|
||
pursuit of individual goals. It may seem, therefore, that ontological
|
||
philosophy is inherently unable to explain why he ought prefer on to
|
||
the other. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">There
|
||
is, however, a sufficient reason for being moral, because there is a
|
||
simple and straightforward optimal resolution of this conflict which
|
||
comes from recognizing the difference between necessary and optional
|
||
goals of individual self interest. That is, submitting to moral rules
|
||
is good for the rational subject because it contributes to the
|
||
natural perfection of the whole of which the rational subject. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is a
|
||
necessary goal of the spiritual animal that its members observe moral
|
||
rules, because that is a condition that affects its reproduction as a
|
||
whole. The spiritual animal cannot act at all unless morality
|
||
prevails, because that relationship among its parts is essential to
|
||
its health. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">On the
|
||
other side, it is not a necessary goal for the individual to act
|
||
contrary to moral rules. Moral rules limit the <i>means </i>the
|
||
individual uses to attain individual goals, but they do not prevent
|
||
him from attaining his necessary goals, at least, not in a healthy
|
||
spiritual animal. In healthy spiritual animals, individuals are able
|
||
to attain their necessary goals by moral means, if they make a
|
||
reasonable effort. Thus, <i>necessary </i>individual goals never
|
||
conflict with the necessary spiritual goal of being moral. Though
|
||
moral rules may limit <i>how </i>the individual pursues necessary
|
||
individual goals, that is merely to constrain his pursuit of his
|
||
optional individual goals, for there are other ways to attain them
|
||
and one way is good for the individual only because he chooses it. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
moral rules may make it impossible to pursue some optional goals at
|
||
all. But since optional goals are good for the individual only
|
||
because he chooses them, the individual can contribute to the natural
|
||
perfection of the whole of which he is part by constraining his
|
||
choices of optional goals in such a way that his pursuit of them does
|
||
not involve the violation of moral rules. That is not a severe
|
||
limitation on individual interest, because there are so many good
|
||
goals to choose from in making goals good for himself. Thus, there is
|
||
obviously a best way to maximize the attainment of the goals that are
|
||
good for rational subjects, including both his individual and his
|
||
spiritual self interest, and it involves being moral. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This
|
||
implies, however, that in situations where following moral rules
|
||
would make it impossible to attain the necessary goals of individual
|
||
interest with a reasonable effort, it is not wrong to violate moral
|
||
rules. But that is not surprising, because when the spiritual animal
|
||
is not healthy enough to continue to exist, it does not contribute to
|
||
the natural perfection of the whole of which the individual is part
|
||
to pursue the goals that are necessary for the spiritual animal. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Rational
|
||
subjects ought, therefore, to observe moral limits on their pursuit
|
||
of individual goals, because it contributes to the natural perfection
|
||
of the whole of which the rational subject is part. In this case,
|
||
however, the whole is a unique combination of animals (or primary
|
||
structures) at two different levels of biological organization,
|
||
because the rational subject, as the agent of reason, is responsible
|
||
for both. The priority of morality is a necessary goal of the
|
||
spiritual animal (in virtue of controlling a condition that affects
|
||
its reproduction as a whole), and since it does not conflict with any
|
||
necessary goal of individual interest, being moral is what
|
||
contributes to the natural perfection of their combination. Thus, it
|
||
is good for rational subjects to take morality as prior to their
|
||
individual interest. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In response
|
||
to Moore’s open question argument, once again, it will not make
|
||
sense for rational beings who understand the nature of reason and its
|
||
place in the natural world to ask, But is what contributes to the
|
||
natural perfection of both spiritual animals and their members good? </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This reason
|
||
for being moral is also part of the wisdom that Socrates was seeking,
|
||
because this ontological explanation of the nature of goodness
|
||
explains why the priority of moral rules is good for the rational
|
||
subject. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">W<img src="" name="OdmE_9" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="133" height="83" border="0">hat
|
||
makes this an adequate explanation of why it is good for the rational
|
||
subject to be moral is the assumption that moral rules do not
|
||
conflict with the attainment of necessary goals of his individual
|
||
self interest. But morality is not the only way that his spiritual
|
||
interest can conflict with his individual interest. The pursuit of
|
||
optional goals of the spiritual animal may conflict with the rational
|
||
subject’s pursuit of necessary goals of individual interest, and
|
||
thus, there is another conflict among goals that needs to be
|
||
resolved. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Conflicts
|
||
clearly do occur between goals of the spiritual animal and the
|
||
necessary goals of the individual. Spiritual animals often find it
|
||
useful to sacrifice some of its members in pursuing its social level
|
||
goals, especially in civilized societies, where a class structure
|
||
gives some members enormous power over other members, and in mass
|
||
societies, where subgroups are historically antagonistic with one
|
||
another. The history of oppression shows that this possibility has
|
||
been actualized far too often. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">One kind of
|
||
conflict between spiritual and individual goals is so basic to the
|
||
existence of both, however, that its burden on individuals cannot be
|
||
counted as contrary to the necessary goals of individual self
|
||
interest. That is the need of individual members to risk their lives
|
||
in war. War is the inevitable form of group level natural selection
|
||
that is responsible for the evolution of rational spiritual animals,
|
||
and thus, neither spiritual animals nor rational beings can exist
|
||
without accepting the burdens of fighting. The sacrifice of
|
||
individuals in war does not, therefore, conflict with the attainment
|
||
of necessary goals of individual self interest in the relevant sense.
|
||
</font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The same
|
||
may be said about dealing with natural disasters, insofar as group
|
||
level action that sacrifices individual members is required to
|
||
control conditions that affect the reproduction of the spiritual
|
||
animal as a whole. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
rules of justice are meant to limit spiritual animals in the pursuit
|
||
of its social goals in order to protect the rights of individuals.
|
||
They are generally formulated in terms of inviolable individual
|
||
rights because they are meant to protect individual rational subjects
|
||
from being sacrificed unnecessarily in the pursuit of spiritual
|
||
goals. Such rights include the most basic means by which rational
|
||
subjects pursue goals of individual interest, both necessary and
|
||
optional. Such rights include all the means the rational subject must
|
||
have in order to attain necessary goals of their individual interest,
|
||
and there are two general classes of them: basic liberties and
|
||
distributive justice. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Basic
|
||
liberties. </i>Rational subjects must have the basic means required
|
||
to attain necessary goals and lead a normal life, including the right
|
||
to lead one’s life free from unreasonable arrest or other
|
||
unnecessary restrictions, the right to speak, associate and contract
|
||
with other people in public, the right to hold the beliefs that one
|
||
takes to be true, the right to an equal opportunity to pursue
|
||
optional goals and the like. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Distributive
|
||
justice</i>. Rational subjects must have enough economic power to be
|
||
able, with a reasonable effort, to provide the material conditions of
|
||
life, including the means for attaining necessary goals, such as
|
||
food, shelter, medicine, and the capacity to have a normal social
|
||
life. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">But
|
||
when spiritual goals do conflict with necessary goals of individual
|
||
self interest, why should the spiritual animal observe rules of
|
||
justice? This is the mirror image of the issue about the priority of
|
||
moral rules over the pursuit of goals of individual interest. We are
|
||
asking why the rules of justice are prior to the pursuit of goals of
|
||
spiritual self interest? </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">All the
|
||
goals are goals for reason, that is, for rational subjects acting in
|
||
their capacity as the behavior guidance system for both the
|
||
individual and spiritual animal, and what ought to exist depends on
|
||
what contributes to the natural perfection of the whole, including
|
||
both the spiritual animal and its members. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
individual self interest and the spiritual self interest are equal,
|
||
because they are good in parallel ways, that is, each by contributing
|
||
to the natural perfection of the organism (or primary structure) on
|
||
its level of biological organization, and ontological philosophy
|
||
provides no grounds for preferring one over the other. Both are
|
||
equally the responsibility of reason. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">When
|
||
individual and spiritual goals conflict, what ought to exist for
|
||
reason is what contributes to the natural perfection of reason as the
|
||
behavior guidance system for both biological levels, that is, for the
|
||
rational subject as a rational being. But what are the priorities? </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">What
|
||
makes an optimal balance of individual and spiritual interests
|
||
possible is that the necessary goals of individual and spiritual self
|
||
interest can both normally be attained without conflict. After all,
|
||
spiritual animals are viable organisms. They could not have evolved
|
||
in the first place unless groups of multicellular animals with
|
||
coordinated behavior were better able to control the conditions
|
||
affecting both reproduction on both the individual and social level. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
compatibility of their necessary goals means that only optional goals
|
||
need to be restricted for the good of necessary goals. We have
|
||
assumed all along that necessary goals at each biological level take
|
||
priority over the optional goals at that level. And we have just seen
|
||
that the necessary goals of spiritual interest take precedence over
|
||
the optional goals of individual interest. Thus, to see the optimal
|
||
resolution in this case, we need only consider how necessary goals of
|
||
individual interest take precedence, in the same way, over optional
|
||
goals of spiritual interest. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
resolution of this conflict between individual and spiritual interest
|
||
is the mirror image of the resolution that explained why <i>moral
|
||
rules </i>takes priority over the pursuit of goals in one’s
|
||
individual interest. In this case, it explain why <i>rules of justice
|
||
</i>take priority over the pursuit of goals in one’s spiritual
|
||
interest. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">In
|
||
both cases, the necessary goals of one biological level take
|
||
precedence over the optional goals of the other level. That is a
|
||
symmetrical relationship. And in both cases, that priority determines
|
||
what is good for reason because it is what contributes to the natural
|
||
perfection of the whole of which rational subjects are part, that is,
|
||
the unique combination of reproducing organisms (or primary
|
||
structures) that have evolved by reproductive causation at two levels
|
||
of biological at once. (The priorities are depicted in the diagram of
|
||
the symmetry of individual and spiritual interests).</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="center" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><img src="" name="SymSiS" align="bottom" width="513" height="271" border="0"></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Rules
|
||
of justice limit the pursuit of goals of spiritual interest in the
|
||
same way that rules of morality limits the pursuit of goals of
|
||
individual interest. In both cases, the necessary goals of one
|
||
interest are the foundation for limits on the pursuit of goals of the
|
||
other interest. But they limit the pursuit of necessary goals in a
|
||
different way from how they limit the pursuit of optional goals. They
|
||
limit only the <i>means </i>to the attainment of necessary goals, but
|
||
they can limit the pursuit of certain <i>kinds </i>of optional goals.
|
||
</font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
necessary goals of individual interest limit <i>how </i>the spiritual
|
||
animal pursues its necessary social level goals (just as moral rules
|
||
limit how the rational subject pursues its necessary individual
|
||
goals). Though there are certain goals that spiritual animals must
|
||
attain, there are ways of attaining them that do not keep individual
|
||
from pursuing their necessary individual goals. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This is not
|
||
to say that the spiritual animal cannot sacrifice the property and
|
||
even the lives of individual members in pursuit of necessary goals,
|
||
such as victory at war and protecting against natural disasters. But
|
||
those exceptions are already included. Avoiding the risk of war or
|
||
avoiding mutual defense against natural disasters is not a <i>possible
|
||
</i>means of controlling conditions affecting individual reproduction
|
||
for members of spiritual animals, and thus, they are not necessary
|
||
goals of individual self interest in the first place. Mutual
|
||
protection from predators (and other natural disasters) and fighting
|
||
wars have been necessary to the existence of the spiritual animal
|
||
from the beginning. But individual rights protect the means that
|
||
spiritual animals use to attain such necessary individual goals
|
||
within the limits of morality, and no infringement on the rights of
|
||
individual is justified.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Rules
|
||
of justice would limit the optional goals that the spiritual animal
|
||
can choose (just as moral rules limit the optional goals that
|
||
rational subjects can choose). There may be optional spiritual goals
|
||
that the spiritual animal is not permitted to pursue because they
|
||
would conflict with individuals pursuing their necessary individual
|
||
goals. But that is not a severe limitation on spiritual animals since
|
||
optional goals are good for spiritual animals only because they are
|
||
chosen and there are plenty of other optional spiritual goals on
|
||
which spiritual animals may spend their extra power of rational
|
||
coordinated action. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">For
|
||
example, the spiritual animal would not be justified in sacrificing
|
||
the life of one member to use various of his organs to save the lives
|
||
of several other rational subjects, even though that may maximize the
|
||
total happiness, because maximizing happiness is an optional goal and
|
||
it would violate his right to life. (Individuals may, of course,
|
||
contract with others to set up such an arrangement, and the spiritual
|
||
animal might be in the position of having to enforce the contract.
|
||
But what makes the arrangement good is that it serves the individual
|
||
interests of the participants, and what makes it good for the
|
||
spiritual animal to enforce it, if it is, is that it is good to keep
|
||
the contracts one makes.)</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">There
|
||
may be conflicts between optional spiritual goals and optional
|
||
individual goals. They will be limited if spiritual animals pursue
|
||
optional goals only when there is a consensus about them, because the
|
||
individuals would all contract, in effect, to cooperate in some
|
||
social level goal. But if there are conflicts between optional goals
|
||
on the individual and social biological levels, they do not pose any
|
||
basic problem about what contributes to the natural perfection of the
|
||
whole, that is, both the spiritual animal and its members, because
|
||
optional goals are good <i>for reason </i>only because they are
|
||
chosen and no matter how much extra power rational beings may have,
|
||
there are plenty of optional goals to choose from. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
symmetry between the individual and spiritual interests of rational
|
||
beings makes it clear, therefore, which goals contribute to the
|
||
natural perfection of the whole of which reason is part, including
|
||
both the spiritual animal and its members. Rational subjects acting
|
||
in their individual self interest ought to observe moral rules, and
|
||
rational subjects acting in their spiritual self interest (that is,
|
||
in guiding social level behavior) ought to observe rules of justice,
|
||
including both basic liberties and distributive justice (the economic
|
||
means to attain necessary individual goals). This is the way to
|
||
maximize the attainment of all the goals being pursued by rational
|
||
beings, for by including the attainment of necessary goals on both
|
||
levels, it makes it possible to pursue optional goals on both level
|
||
of biological organization. Thus, it is the set of priorities that
|
||
contributes to the natural perfection of rational beings. Thus, it is
|
||
good to be moral and to be just. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">In
|
||
response to Moore’s open question argument, once again, it will not
|
||
make sense for rational beings who understand the nature of reason
|
||
and its place in the natural world to ask, But is what contributes to
|
||
the natural perfection of both spiritual animals and their members
|
||
good? </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">This
|
||
reason for being moral is also part of the wisdom that Socrates was
|
||
seeking, because this ontological explanation of the nature of
|
||
goodness explains why the priority of moral rules is good for the
|
||
rational subject. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0; page-break-before: always">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdnR_1" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="117" height="52" border="0">he
|
||
one remaining question is whether there is any other practical
|
||
interest of reason. The traditional answer is that there is a kind of
|
||
goal that is higher than both individual and spiritual interest,
|
||
namely, religious interest, or the recognition of something that is
|
||
worthy of worship. Is there anything holy in a spatiomaterial world
|
||
like ours?</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">To
|
||
assert that reason also has a religious interest is to hold that
|
||
there is something worthy of its worship, that is, something that
|
||
reason ought to recognize as holy or sacred and, thus, hold in
|
||
reverence. Such an object would have to be of such exalted glory that
|
||
it would inspire reason to adore it and act in a way befitting it.
|
||
Such an object would be the source of a new kind of goal for reason,
|
||
a goal which serves the religious interest of rational beings. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000">“<font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US">God”
|
||
is the name traditionally given for the object of the religious
|
||
attitude, and the philosophical defense of religion has traditionally
|
||
(in the West) been an argument for the existence of God. God is
|
||
supposed to be a being of such surpassing perfection that He is
|
||
worthy of our worship. But the belief in the existence of a being
|
||
outside of space and time who is responsible for the natural world is
|
||
supernaturalism, indeed, supernaturalism in its most familiar form,
|
||
and that is what ontological philosophy gives up with its basic
|
||
assumption of naturalism. Thus, if the existence of a transcendent
|
||
God were what is required for reason to have a religious interest,
|
||
then ontological philosophy would have to deny that reason has any
|
||
such interest.</span></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
repudiation of belief in a transcendent God has led naturalists to
|
||
see religion in terms of its traditional function of justifying
|
||
morality, and thus, it might be argued that ontological philosophy
|
||
has already explained the religious interest by the spiritual
|
||
interest of reason, as part of necessary truths of theoretical reason
|
||
about what is. But if that is all there is to be said about religion,
|
||
God is an illusion, and there are no religious goals for ontological
|
||
reason to pursue, because ontological philosophy explains religion
|
||
away. Ontological philosophy reveals that the reason for being moral
|
||
derives from our spiritual interest, that is, from the function of
|
||
reason as the behavior guidance system for both the spiritual animal
|
||
and the individual. It would follow, then, that reason did not pursue
|
||
religious goals because there is actually something worthy of
|
||
worship, but simply because such beliefs were the most efficient way
|
||
of guiding behavior to contribute to the natural perfection of
|
||
rational beings, both individual and spiritual. It would debunk
|
||
religion, because once ontological reason saw through its function,
|
||
religion would no longer be needed to justify morality or to justify
|
||
submitting to the group. Nor would reason be able to believe in
|
||
anything like God, except, of course, as their own spiritual animal.
|
||
But to hold that the interest of their own spiritual animal is what
|
||
is served by the pursuit of religious goals would be to reduce
|
||
religion to tribalism. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">If this is
|
||
how ontological philosophy must treat religion, people with a
|
||
religious sensibility would surely use it as a weapon against
|
||
ontological philosophy. It is ontological philosophy that believes in
|
||
tribalism, for it makes the spiritual animal the source of highest
|
||
goods that reason pursues. By contrast, traditional religions,
|
||
despite their troubled histories, have usually thought of their goals
|
||
as something more than mere tribalism, especially Christianity and
|
||
Islam, with their universalistic claims. Thus, if ontological
|
||
philosophy must simply dismiss religion, as most contemporary
|
||
naturalists do, there are many people who will be disillusioned, if
|
||
they accept it, and regret the absence of anything of truly ultimate
|
||
value. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
issue is, therefore, whether there is anything in a spatiomaterial
|
||
world like ours that is worthy of worship by rational beings, that
|
||
is, anything that rational beings would submit to from sheer
|
||
knowledge of its exalted nature. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">None of the
|
||
goals of reason explained thus far by ontological philosophy can be
|
||
considered religious, because they are not pursued from awe at the
|
||
prospect of something of extraordinary perfection and glory.
|
||
Necessary goals of reason are pursued because they control conditions
|
||
that affect the reproduction of the individuals or spiritual animals
|
||
whose behavior reason guides. To be sure, optional goals are good for
|
||
contributing to the natural (or artificial) perfection of something
|
||
other than rational beings, but they are good for rational beings
|
||
only because they are chosen. If ontological reason has a religious
|
||
interest, therefore, there must be goals that are more valuable for
|
||
reason than mere optional goals without being required in the way
|
||
that necessary goals are.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The only
|
||
way ontological reason could have such an interest is if there is
|
||
something worthy of worship in a spatiomaterial world like ours. And
|
||
as it turns out, there is. The reason is that it is possible that
|
||
there is — or will be — an absolutely perfect being in a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours. And the possibility of such a perfect
|
||
being is enough, as we shall see, to make the religious attitude
|
||
appropriate and to explain how reason has a religious interest in
|
||
addition to its individual and spiritual interest. Ontological reason
|
||
will pursue goals that are good because they contribute to the
|
||
natural perfection of the world itself, and the pursuit of such
|
||
religious goals will make the world even more perfect. Indeed, since
|
||
ontological reason takes responsibility for doing what is good for
|
||
the world, as well as the individuals and spiritual animals whose
|
||
behavior it already guides, it will be the agent for the world,
|
||
making the world itself a rational being. Thus, the world itself will
|
||
be a perfect rational being. God is immanent, not transcendent.
|
||
Though such an absolutely perfect rational being is something that
|
||
will be created by reason, it is something that is worthy of worship,
|
||
and the work of ontological reason in the world is to bring God into
|
||
existence. That is how reason <i>makes </i>the world "whole."
|
||
</font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">A<img src="" name="OdnR_2" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="106" height="41" border="0">
|
||
Perfect Being is possible in a spatiomaterial world like ours,
|
||
because it could be the outcome of evolution. We have seen how the
|
||
basic nature of a spatiomaterial world with a large scale structure
|
||
like our own and with matter that is capable of taking on complex
|
||
molecular structures like ours makes evolution by reproductive
|
||
causation inevitable. Not only does evolution inevitably begin on
|
||
suitable planets, but it goes through inevitable stages that lead up
|
||
to rational beings like us. And as we have seen, when reason finally
|
||
comes to understand how the world is whole, it discovers its own
|
||
nature as a behavior guidance system for both the individual and the
|
||
spiritual animal, and as I have suggested, that makes reason the most
|
||
powerful being in the world. But what I want to suggest now is that,
|
||
if rational beings take the perfect being that would come to exist
|
||
they it were to pursue religious goals to be worthy of worship,
|
||
ontological reason will eventually evolve all the perfections that
|
||
have traditionally been attributed to God, insofar as that is
|
||
possible in a spatiomaterial world. The evolution of ontological
|
||
reason would make the world itself an absolutely perfect being, that
|
||
is, God. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdnR_3" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="74" height="37" border="0">he
|
||
personal perfection attributed to God are omniscience, omnipotence,
|
||
and absolute goodness. It is possible for reason to evolve all the
|
||
perfections attributed to God as a person, because a person is a
|
||
rational being and theses traits are the perfection of reason as a
|
||
behavior guidance system. They are, respectively, the perfection of
|
||
knowing, doing, and choosing. This would be the outcome of a late
|
||
phase of cultural evolution during the philosophical stage of
|
||
spiritual evolution, one that starts with reason understanding of its
|
||
own nature and place in the world (that is, with ontological reason)
|
||
and may not be complete for some time. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Reason has
|
||
three functions, let us recall, because behavior guidance systems are
|
||
not mere cybernetic (or functional) systems, which use feedback to
|
||
guide their behavior toward some goal, but have a function in
|
||
addition to input and output, namely, choosing between incompatible
|
||
goals. Even if the same input is used to select the kind of behavior
|
||
and to generate it, as in animals, the selection is a third,
|
||
essential sub-function of behavior guidance systems, the one that
|
||
makes them the locus of evolutionary progress. It is the perfection
|
||
of these three functions of behavior guidance systems that accounts
|
||
for the traditional perfections: omniscience has to do with the input
|
||
function, omnipotence with the output function, and absolute goodness
|
||
with the function of choosing. In rational beings, the first has to
|
||
do with the perfection of knowing, the second with the perfection of
|
||
doing, and the third with the perfection of choosing. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>O<img src="" name="OdnR_4" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="54" height="34" border="0">mniscience</i>.
|
||
Reason will eventually be omniscient, because the input to this
|
||
behavior guidance system will be the most complete knowledge of the
|
||
world possible. Reason will be able to know everything that it is
|
||
possible for reason to know about the world. That is possible, given
|
||
the nature of space and matter in our world, since as we know,
|
||
everything in the world and everything about the world can be
|
||
explained by how it is constituted by those two kinds of opposite
|
||
substances. What is ontologically necessary in a spatiomaterial world
|
||
like our own can be known without explaining why the basic laws of
|
||
physics are true, but there is no reason to doubt that reason will
|
||
eventually understand the essential natures of space and matter that
|
||
make the basic laws of physics true. The knowledge of what is
|
||
ontologically necessary is the framework that makes it possible to
|
||
explain as completely as required any aspect of the world. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
this kind of omniscience does not include knowing all the contingent
|
||
details about the world, nor does it include knowing aspects of the
|
||
future that depend on its own practical reasoning. But that is the
|
||
kind of omniscience one might expect of a transcendent God, not what
|
||
can be expected of an immanent God. As an immanent God, reason will
|
||
be able to know as much about any contingent aspect of the world as
|
||
is possible for any part of a world made of space and matter. And
|
||
since it will be able to figure out how efficient causes can be used
|
||
to control whatever can be controlled in such a world, it will be
|
||
able to discover whatever is relevant to attaining its goals. That is
|
||
as much as is possible for a being in space and time.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">As
|
||
ontological reason begins this phase, the biggest gap in its
|
||
knowledge is in astronomy and cosmology. But that does not affect the
|
||
possibility of this future course of evolution, because it does not
|
||
affect what reason knows about evolution and its own nature as the
|
||
outcome of biological evolution. It is not necessary to know why the
|
||
basic laws of physics are true to demonstrate the global regularities
|
||
about change; it is only necessary to know that they are true. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>O<img src="" name="OdnR_5" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="54" height="34" border="0">mnipotence.</i>
|
||
Reason will also be omnipotent, because the output of this behavior
|
||
guidance system can control conditions in the world as well as any
|
||
structural cause can in a spatiomaterial world like ours. Its
|
||
omniscience includes knowledge about the means to any goals it may
|
||
choose (or, at least, where to look for them and how to recognize
|
||
them when they are found), and so the only limit to its power will be
|
||
its ability to structure the thermodynamic flow of matter from
|
||
potential energy to evenly distributed heat. But reason is
|
||
responsible for guiding the behavior not only of individual rational
|
||
subjects, but also spiritual animals, and thus, no structural cause
|
||
can be more powerful than the spiritual structural cause of spiritual
|
||
animals guided by reason, for it can coordinate the behavior of as
|
||
many, independently moving animal bodies as are needed to attain the
|
||
goals that it pursues. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Nothing can
|
||
equal its power except another spiritual animal. But as we shall see,
|
||
war would be overcome, when reason understands the nature of
|
||
goodness, because of its pursuit of religious goals. Understanding
|
||
the basic cause of war makes it clear what rational beings must do in
|
||
order to attain their goals without resorting to war. Without such
|
||
conflicts among spiritual animals, rational beings will be as
|
||
powerful as possible as anything that can exist in a spatiomaterial
|
||
world. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Nor is the
|
||
omnipotence of such spiritual animals is merely potential. Though the
|
||
parts are rational subjects who are autonomous, they will cooperate
|
||
in pursuing the goals that spiritual animals pursue, if they are
|
||
good. Their autonomy as rational beings is what enables them to
|
||
cooperate in pursuing such goals, because it enables them to do what
|
||
they believe is good. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Though
|
||
reason will not be omnipotent in the way that a transcendent God is
|
||
supposed to be, it will be able to attain any goal that is it
|
||
possible for a part of a spatiomaterial world. And the lack of the
|
||
power to do magic or create a natural world from nothing is not a
|
||
real limitation, if the world is made of space and matter, because it
|
||
is not ontologically possible in the first place. Omniscience has
|
||
never been understood as the power to do what is impossible. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>A<img src="" name="OdnR_6" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="58" height="34" border="0">bsolute
|
||
Goodness.</i> Reason could also be absolutely good in the end. We
|
||
have already seen why reason would pursue what is good for reason.
|
||
All that needs to be added for reason to be a perfect being is that
|
||
it also pursue what is good for the world as a whole, that is, to
|
||
pursue religious goals. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Ontological
|
||
reason would always pursue what is good for itself, as we have seen,
|
||
because the function of choosing how to behave is served by a
|
||
behavior guidance system that discovers what is good by understanding
|
||
the nature of goodness. It recognizes that goodness is contributing
|
||
to natural perfection, and rational imagination gives reason the
|
||
ability to tell what is naturally perfect by seeing how it is a
|
||
unique optimum against the background of what is possible. And since
|
||
ontological reason recognizes itself as an essential part of such a
|
||
natural perfection, it has sufficient reason to do what is good. It
|
||
knows that there can be no reason not to do what contributes to the
|
||
natural perfection of which it is part. Thus, it will do what is good
|
||
for reason, that is, it will pursue goals that contribute to the
|
||
natural perfection of reason itself, including both necessary and
|
||
optional goals.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">In
|
||
order to be absolutely good in the sense implicit in traditional
|
||
theology, however, reason would have to pursue goals beyond what is
|
||
good for rational subjects and spiritual animals. To do God’s work
|
||
is to pursue religious goals, and that means pursuing goals that are
|
||
good in virtue of contributing to the natural perfection of the world
|
||
itself. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">That would
|
||
be possible, if there are conditions that reason can bring about that
|
||
would make the world itself more naturally perfect and they would not
|
||
come to be in any other way. The natural perfection toward which
|
||
evolution proceeds is only what is possible by reproductive
|
||
causation, and natural selection is a crude instrument that takes
|
||
much time and can involve much suffering. By doing what natural
|
||
selection cannot do, or doing it more quickly or less wastefully,
|
||
reason could make contributions to natural perfection that are not
|
||
otherwise possible. It might make the structural causes bundled
|
||
together in organisms or the organisms combined in ecologies even
|
||
more optimal in the sense of having more power to control relevant
|
||
conditions, and reason might make contributions to the natural
|
||
perfection of life and the natural perfection of change by avoiding
|
||
setbacks in evolutionary progress or changing their timing. Such
|
||
goals would require much more detailed understanding of the evolving
|
||
structures involved, but it is not impossible to make the world even
|
||
more naturally perfect than it would be otherwise. Thus, reason could
|
||
be good in the sense of doing what is good for the world itself,
|
||
rather than just what is good for rational subjects and spiritual
|
||
animals. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">There
|
||
are some specific goals that might be good for reason to pursue
|
||
because they contribute something to the natural perfection of the
|
||
world that cannot come to exist in any other way. They include the
|
||
goals mentioned above as optional goals for spiritual animals. But
|
||
what we need to recognize now in order to see how there could be a
|
||
perfect being in a spatiomaterial world like ours is that they are
|
||
also good in a different way -- not because they are chosen, but
|
||
because they contribute to the natural perfection of the world.
|
||
Instead of being optional, we need to suppose that reason pursues
|
||
them because they are good for the world as a whole, thereby taking
|
||
responsibility for making the world more perfect than it would be
|
||
otherwise. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">One such
|
||
goal is the protection of the ecology from disruption by spiritual
|
||
animals, or what is called protection of the environment. Though the
|
||
capacity to survive storms, asteroids and other natural disasters may
|
||
be part of the natural perfection of the ecology, protection from
|
||
what spiritual animals do to it is unique, because it is an effect on
|
||
the ecology that only reason can control. Furthermore, there may also
|
||
be other ways in which reason might make the ecology more perfect in
|
||
the sense of maximizing the use of available free energy to fuel
|
||
reproductive cycles than is possible by reproductive causation. For
|
||
example, it might make the ecology more perfect to tend it like a
|
||
garden so that more of the available free energy is consumed.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Another
|
||
such goal would be to replace the natural selection of spiritual
|
||
animals by warfare with measures that would make spiritual animals
|
||
just as perfect, but without the suffering involved in warfare. The
|
||
only way to stop war, however, is to control population growth, since
|
||
war is merely the form that the natural selection caused by
|
||
reproduction takes in the case of spiritual animals. But this would
|
||
not necessarily make evolution and the world more naturally perfect,
|
||
unless reason also tended to spiritual animals themselves so that
|
||
they become no less naturally perfect for organisms of their kind
|
||
without natural selection. But if that is possible, it would surely
|
||
make the world itself more perfect, because it would attain the same
|
||
end with fewer and simpler means than all suffering the effects of
|
||
war. War is, after all, a very wasteful means to the evolution of
|
||
spiritual animals. Thus, the creation of a world order in which all
|
||
spiritual animals could live in peace with one another into the
|
||
indefinite future is a plausible religious goal.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Another
|
||
possible religious goal would take over natural selection at the
|
||
individual level as well as the social level. Natural selection at
|
||
the individual level is responsible for rational subjects evolving
|
||
toward the natural perfection of organisms of their kind, but insofar
|
||
as it is still at work, it is also a wasteful process because of the
|
||
suffering that it involves (such as individuals dying of genetic
|
||
diseases). But reason could take over from natural selection as the
|
||
cause of individual evolution by intervening in the germ line to
|
||
correct genetic defects and to change genetic structures so that
|
||
rational subjects are more powerful in attaining the goals they
|
||
pursue, that is, are more naturally perfect as rational subjects. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">There are
|
||
surely other religious goals, including many that can be pursued on
|
||
the individual level, because there are other changes that reason
|
||
could bring about in the world that are neither necessary goals nor
|
||
mere optional goals, but that would make the world itself more
|
||
naturally perfect. And as far as spiritual animals are concerned, one
|
||
of the more important religious goals will probably be the
|
||
colonization of the solar system in the sense of changing conditions
|
||
on them so that life can evolve on them as well as on earth. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">All
|
||
that is required for the outcome of evolution to have the personal
|
||
perfections traditionally attributed to God is for ontological reason
|
||
to pursue goals because they contribute to the natural perfection of
|
||
the world itself, rather than just because they contribute to the
|
||
natural perfection of reason in its role as the behavior guidance
|
||
system for rational subjects and spiritual animals. That would mean
|
||
that religious goals rank after the necessary goals of rational
|
||
beings, yet ahead of their optional goals. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Religious
|
||
goals would not be good because they are necessary goals of reason.
|
||
Necessary goals of reason are those that control conditions that
|
||
affect its reproduction, either as individuals or as spiritual
|
||
animals. But religious goals are good because they contribute to the
|
||
natural perfection, not of the individual or the spiritual animal,
|
||
but the world itself. Religious goals cannot reduce to necessary
|
||
goals of reason as the behavior guidance system of the world, because
|
||
there are no conditions that affect the reproduction of the world
|
||
itself. What makes religious goals good is simply contributing to the
|
||
natural perfection of the world. But that requires seeing the world
|
||
itself as a form of natural perfection. It depends on reason
|
||
understanding the nature of goodness as contributing to natural
|
||
perfection and seeing how what reason can do beyond merely
|
||
controlling conditions that affect the reproduction of rational
|
||
beings would contribute to the natural perfection of the whole. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Nor would
|
||
religious goals be good as mere optional goals, either of individual
|
||
subjects or spiritual animals. Optional goals are good for reason
|
||
because they are already good in some way, and reason makes them good
|
||
for reason by choosing them. Though religious goals are also already
|
||
good, they are good in a unique way, because they contribute to the
|
||
natural perfection of the world itself, not just to the natural (or
|
||
artificial) perfection of a part of it that happens to catch one’s
|
||
fancy. Nor are religious goals good for reason simply because reason
|
||
chooses to pursue them. Rather they are good because they make the
|
||
world itself naturally perfect. If religious goals are good for
|
||
reason at all, they are good for reason whether or not rational
|
||
beings choose to pursue them. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
religious interest, if ontological reason has such an interest, is,
|
||
therefore, distinct from both necessary and optional goals. There is
|
||
no reason to believe that religious goals would conflict with the
|
||
necessary goals of reason, because the control of conditions
|
||
affecting individual and social level reproduction would be an
|
||
essential part of the natural perfection of the world. But the
|
||
pursuit of religious goals would affect the pursuit of optional
|
||
goals, both individual and spiritual, because reason would see their
|
||
goodness as prior to optional goals. Most optional goals would be
|
||
compatible with the natural perfection of the world, because optional
|
||
goals also contribute to natural (or artificial) perfection in some
|
||
way. But the religious interest would set priorities among optional
|
||
goals, because in the context of an overall plan is to make the world
|
||
itself perfect, some optional goals will contribute more to the
|
||
natural perfection of the whole than others. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Ontological
|
||
reason has, therefore, the potentiality of being not only omniscient
|
||
and omnipotent, but also absolutely good. But if that is the future
|
||
of evolution, it means that the advent of ontological philosophy is
|
||
only the beginning of a phase of the philosophical stage of the
|
||
gradual evolution of spiritual animals that leads to it. It will be
|
||
mainly cultural evolution by rational selection, but the natural
|
||
perfection for culture of this kind may not be complete until the far
|
||
distant future, because there may be much for reason to do,
|
||
including, perhaps, even stages in the evolution of the means it uses
|
||
to attain its ends. After all, the social and political problems that
|
||
it must solve are not insignificant and reason has only begun to
|
||
acquire the technological control of nature that is possible.
|
||
However, if ontological reason does pursue religious goals, a perfect
|
||
being with all three personal perfections traditionally attributed to
|
||
God would be the natural perfection toward which gradual change
|
||
during that stage will proceed. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
existence of such a perfect individual and spiritual being in the
|
||
world would be a form of natural perfection by our definition of
|
||
“natural perfection,” because it would be the kind of optimal
|
||
part-whole relation that makes the most of what exists in a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours. For an all-knowing and all-powerful
|
||
being to act for the good of the world as a whole would be for
|
||
structural causes to use as much free energy as possible to control
|
||
as much as possible of what happens in the world. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To pursue
|
||
religious goals would make reason more powerful than simply pursuing
|
||
necessary and optional goals, because it would be to set a priority
|
||
among optional goals with an eye to making the world as a whole
|
||
naturally perfect. Since the goals pursued would do what is required
|
||
for the natural perfection of the whole, they would fit together more
|
||
completely than any other set of goals, and thus, reason would be
|
||
doing as much as possible to control what happens in the world. In
|
||
other words, to pursue goals that conflict with religious goals could
|
||
only detract from the maximum power of life, and to pursue optional
|
||
goals instead of religious goals would be to have less effect on the
|
||
world than is possible. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Acknowledging
|
||
its religious interest would, of course, make only its planetary
|
||
system naturally perfect, because given how space separates it from
|
||
other planetary systems, that is the only part of the world that it
|
||
can affect. But that is all that ontological reason can contribute to
|
||
the natural perfection of the world as a whole, at least, for the
|
||
foreseeable future. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Furthermore,
|
||
it is clear that there can be no further evolutionary stage in the
|
||
series that has led to ontological reason, because there is no higher
|
||
level of part-whole complexity in reason as a behavior guidance
|
||
system that would make it any more powerful. No higher level of
|
||
forensic organization (that is, in the part-whole complexity of
|
||
argument) can guide behavior any better than one in which reason
|
||
understands its own nature as a system for guiding behavior that has
|
||
evolved in a world of matter and space in time like our own, for
|
||
there is no higher level of reflection than one that understands the
|
||
wholeness of the world. Ontological philosophy is already complete in
|
||
that way. Thus, once reason understands its own nature and function
|
||
as a behavior guidance system, no other structure could discover what
|
||
is good for individuals or spiritual animals better than it. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">There is,
|
||
by the way, no possibility that machines constructed as artifacts
|
||
will replace multicellular animals as rational subjects, except for
|
||
modifications of human biology. A machine could, perhaps, eventually
|
||
be as powerful as reason, though that would require it to have
|
||
rational imagination (including spatial and structural imagination as
|
||
well as the capacity to reflect on itself). But such a machine would
|
||
not be conscious in the way we are, unless it was constructed of
|
||
neurons like our own, because the phenomenal properties whose
|
||
intrinsic natures explain the subjective aspect of experience (or the
|
||
fact that it is like something to perceive and think) are the
|
||
intrinsic natures of the photons generated by the synchronized firing
|
||
of many neurons throughout the cerebrum, like an extraordinarily
|
||
complex antenna. Rational beings would not choose to replace
|
||
conscious rational beings with machines that are not conscious, that
|
||
is, with Zombies. They might know and control all the same conditions
|
||
that make the world perfect, but without the unity of mind, there is
|
||
a way in which the perfection would not exist at all. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">If,
|
||
therefore, ontological reason does find the prospect of such a
|
||
perfect being worthy of worship and reason does evolve toward natural
|
||
perfection of this kind, it will be the last stage of evolution,
|
||
because it will have a kind of behavior guidance system than which
|
||
none more naturally perfect can be conceived. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdnR_7" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="74" height="37" border="0">he
|
||
kind of natural perfection that exists at this point in the evolution
|
||
of philosophical spirit may be dwarfed by the perfection that
|
||
eventually comes to exist, but it is clear that its basic nature
|
||
permits it to acquire all the perfections that have traditionally
|
||
been attributed to God as a person. Indeed, the traditional view of
|
||
God can be seen as an attempt to conceive the greater perfection that
|
||
is potential in rational beings before reason understands its own
|
||
nature and place in the world. The traditional belief in God merely
|
||
looks for God in the wrong place, as something that transcends
|
||
nature, rather than as something in or about nature itself. But in
|
||
order to show that what could evolve from ontological reason is a
|
||
perfect being in the sense of a traditional God, it is necessary to
|
||
show that this kind of perfect being also has the ontological
|
||
perfections traditionally ascribed to God: being necessary,
|
||
ubiquitous, and eternal. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Just as
|
||
omniscience, omnipotence, and absolute goodness are simply the
|
||
perfection of the three subfunctions of a behavior guidance system,
|
||
so these three <i>ontological perfections </i>can be seen as holding
|
||
of reason because it is the inevitable outcome of evolution in a
|
||
world of matter and space like ours enduring through in time. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>N<img src="" name="OdnR_8" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="65" height="36" border="0">ecessary
|
||
being.</i> God as a perfect rational being would be a necessary being
|
||
in a spatiomaterial world like ours, if it is the eventual outcome of
|
||
evolution, because evolution is a process that inevitably gets
|
||
started on suitable planets. His existence would follow from the
|
||
nature of a world of matter and space in time, given that matter has
|
||
the nature described by the basic laws of physics in this world and
|
||
the universe has a large scale structure like our own. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">If
|
||
ontological reason inevitably acknowledges a religious interest, the
|
||
existence of a perfect being would be a consequence of the basic
|
||
nature of a spatiomaterial world like ours. Since evolution is, as we
|
||
have seen, a global regularity, we might say that the necessity of a
|
||
perfect rational being is shown mainly by recognizing how space is an
|
||
ontological cause of evolution. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This would
|
||
give God, however, the same kind of necessity that the world itself
|
||
has, and there is another way in which God has traditionally been
|
||
thought to be necessary. That is, substances exist necessarily
|
||
because they cannot come into existence nor go out of existence as
|
||
time passes, and that makes God necessary, since God is their
|
||
necessary ontological effect. But the necessary existence of God has
|
||
been said to derive from His being the cause of Himself, or <i>causa
|
||
sui</i>. That would also be true of this perfect rational being, as
|
||
we shall see, if ontological reason, in its practical capacity,
|
||
inevitably acknowledges a religious interest. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>U<img src="" name="OdnR_9" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="63" height="36" border="0">biquitous
|
||
being.</i> God is ubiquitous in a spatiomaterial world, because it is
|
||
a necessary being. Reason will evolve everywhere in a spatiomaterial
|
||
world with a large scale structure like our own, though its frequency
|
||
depends on how often suitable planets occur. If reason must evolve
|
||
into God, God will exist throughout the universe. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
scientists who understand that life could exist on other planets have
|
||
set up antennas to listen for messages from more advanced life forms
|
||
in the hope of solving the mysteries of the universe, and they have
|
||
come up with nothing. But if ontological philosophy is right about
|
||
the course of evolution, that is just what we should expect.
|
||
Ontological reason will not even try to communicate with life on
|
||
other planets, because it will know that intervening and solving the
|
||
problems that reason confronts on other planets would only cripple
|
||
the spiritual beings that are evolving there. On the other hand, if
|
||
ontological reason has already evolved on distant planets, there is
|
||
nothing to say to them, at least, not in that way. (There may be
|
||
other ways that rational beings from different planetary systems
|
||
interact. But they will be severely limited, given the distances they
|
||
are separated in space and the impossibility of traveling faster than
|
||
light, and they will occur at a much later point in the evolution of
|
||
perfect rational beings.) </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Reason is
|
||
also ubiquitous in another sense, which comes from its spiritual
|
||
nature as the behavior guidance system of a spiritual animal. As
|
||
ontological reason evolves control over everything that happens on
|
||
its planet or in its planetary system, there will be a single
|
||
spiritual structural cause whose non-reproductive work dominates its
|
||
entire planet, and eventually the entire planetary system where it
|
||
evolves.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
ubiquity of a perfect being is a consequence of the basic nature of a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours, but in a world that is obviously in
|
||
space, evolution depends on matter being of the same kind everywhere.
|
||
Hence, we might hold that its ubiquity is shown mainly by how matter
|
||
is an ontological cause of evolution.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>E<img src="" name="OdnR_10" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="60" height="36" border="0">ternal
|
||
being. </i>God is eternal in a spatiomaterial world, also because it
|
||
is a necessary being. God will exist as long as the universe itself
|
||
does, because He will evolve again and again throughout the existence
|
||
of the world. If the universe is eternal, God will have eternal life.
|
||
</font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Moreover,
|
||
particular Gods can be eternal in their own planetary systems,
|
||
because spiritual animals can exist indefinitely, even if individual
|
||
rational subjects cannot, and there will always be some free energy
|
||
to use as fuel for their reproductive cycles. Though God may have to
|
||
inhabit only the farther reaches of the planetary system when the sun
|
||
becomes a red giant and engulfs the earth. There is now about four
|
||
and a half billion years to prepare. And if the red giant later
|
||
becomes a white dwarf, God could move back in closer and have all the
|
||
free energy required to exist indefinitely, if He so chooses. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This is to
|
||
hold that the expansion of the universe does not end (as suggested in
|
||
our discussion of cosmology). That is the most likely case, because
|
||
as far as scientists can tell, there is not enough matter for
|
||
gravitation to cause the universe to collapse back to another Big
|
||
Bang, and apparently not even enough to slow the expansion to a stop
|
||
asymptotically, that means the universe is eternal. However, if the
|
||
Big Bang is a recurrent local process, as suggested earlier, there
|
||
would be no end to the evolution of perfect rational beings. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
eternity of a perfect being is also a consequence of the basic nature
|
||
of a spatiomaterial world like ours. But since it depends on how the
|
||
space and matter constituting the world endure through time as
|
||
substances, its eternity is shown mainly by how time is an aspect of
|
||
the existential aspect of the nature of substance as substance. Thus,
|
||
the eternality of God might be said to depend on how time is an
|
||
ontological cause of evolution. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">E<img src="" name="OdnR_11" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="74" height="37" border="0">xcept
|
||
for being the creator of the world, therefore, ontological reason
|
||
could eventually come to have all the perfections traditionally
|
||
attributed to God, both personal and ontological perfections. It
|
||
depends on whether ontological reason has a religious interest, that
|
||
is, on whether it chooses to pursue religious goals in addition to
|
||
its spiritual and individual goals, and that depends, in turns, on
|
||
whether the prospect of the perfect being that would result is worthy
|
||
of worship. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">A<img src="" name="OdnR_12" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="55" height="34" border="0">ll
|
||
that is required for ontological reason to evolve into a perfect
|
||
being is for it to pursue goals that are good because they contribute
|
||
to the natural perfection of the world itself, rather than just goals
|
||
that contribute to the natural perfection of reason as the behavior
|
||
guidance system for rational subjects and spiritual animals. Will
|
||
ontological reason pursue religious goals? </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
|
||
cannot be shown that reason ought to and will pursue religious goals
|
||
in the same way that its pursuit of individual and spiritual goals,
|
||
because religious goals do not contribute to the natural perfection
|
||
of rational beings. Religious goals are not necessary goals of
|
||
reason. They do not control conditions that affect the reproduction
|
||
of rational beings at either the multicellular or social level of
|
||
biological organization. And religious goals cannot be explained as
|
||
optional goals, for that does not explain their special worth. Nor
|
||
would optional religious goals make the existence of God inevitable. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To have a
|
||
religious interest, reason would have to be the behavior guidance
|
||
system for the world as a whole. But that is not a function reason
|
||
could possibly have as a result of biological evolution. The pursuit
|
||
of goals that contribute to the natural perfection of the world
|
||
cannot evolve like another level of biological organization,
|
||
beginning another stage of biological evolution, because the world
|
||
itself is not a reproducing organism. That is, the world as a whole
|
||
is not a primary structure generating reproductive cycles. Even
|
||
something as small as the planetary system or the planet is still the
|
||
whole in which evolution takes place, not a level of biological
|
||
organization. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
|
||
is nevertheless possible for ontological reason to have a religious
|
||
interest. The belief that rational beings ought to pursue religious
|
||
goals would evolve by the rational selection of practical arguments,
|
||
if what would result were perfect enough to be worthy of worship,
|
||
because to beings with a faculty of rational imagination, it will be
|
||
clear that accepting arguments for acknowledging a religious interest
|
||
gives them the most rationally coherent world view. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">As rational
|
||
beings come to understand the nature of reason and its place in the
|
||
world, they will see how it is possible for there to be a perfect
|
||
being in a spatiomaterial world like ours, and they will recognize
|
||
that its existence depends on whether they pursue religious goals, in
|
||
addition to the necessary and optional goals of their and spiritual
|
||
interest. If the perfect being that would result from pursuing
|
||
religious goals is exalted enough that rational beings revere it and
|
||
serve it from the sheer recognition of its unique natural perfection,
|
||
rational beings will identify with the world itself, not just their
|
||
spiritual animals or themselves as individuals. And by acting in the
|
||
interest of the world as a whole, they will contribute what only
|
||
reason can contribute to the natural perfection of all the organisms,
|
||
to the natural perfection of the ecology, to the natural perfection
|
||
of life, and to the natural perfection of evolutionary change itself.
|
||
And by pursuing religious goals, a perfect being will come to exist
|
||
in their planetary system. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
answer that ontological reason will give to this question is obvious
|
||
to anyone who understands the situation in which reason will find
|
||
itself and what is at stake in its choice. Once ontological
|
||
philosophy evolves in the cultures of existing spiritual animals,
|
||
rational beings will actually face this choice, and the answer will
|
||
be acted out in history, determining the future course of evolution.
|
||
But as rational beings who have traveled the path of this whole
|
||
argument, we are in a position to know that ontological reason will
|
||
see the perfect being that they can bring into existence by their
|
||
actions as worth the effort. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Reason
|
||
gives them more power than they need to pursue necessary goals, and
|
||
among the optional goals that are open to them, some will take
|
||
precedence because they contribute to the natural perfection of the
|
||
whole of which they are part. By acknowledging that it has a
|
||
religious interest, reason will change in the direction of maximum
|
||
holistic power, because when the world as a whole is naturally
|
||
perfect, as much as possible of what happens in its planetary system
|
||
will be controlled using the available free energy as efficiently as
|
||
possible. Ontological reason will, therefore, choose to pursue
|
||
religious goals. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This choice
|
||
is similar to another stage of evolution, because an entire new range
|
||
of conditions come under the control of living organisms. In this
|
||
case, those conditions are not relevant in the sense of affecting the
|
||
reproduction of an organism with a higher level of part-whole
|
||
complexity. But the conditions that are controlled are on a higher
|
||
level of part-whole complexity than the necessary and optional goals
|
||
of rational beings, because they contribute to the natural perfection
|
||
of the world itself (that is, at the scale of its planetary system,
|
||
the part of the world it can affect). Thus, what makes it good to
|
||
pursue religious goals is the same thing that makes a higher level of
|
||
part-whole complexity in evolving organisms good: it contributes to
|
||
the natural perfection of life. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Though the
|
||
autonomy of reason makes it possible to pursue any goals that are
|
||
good, the pursuit of religious goals maximizes the holistic power of
|
||
reason, because, as we have seen, they are aimed at controlling all
|
||
those conditions that make the biggest difference in the perfection
|
||
of the world as a whole. There is no other set of goals that would
|
||
enable reason to control more of what happens in the world, and thus,
|
||
religious goals would contribute to the natural perfection of reason
|
||
itself. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>T<img src="" name="OdnR_13" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="56" height="34" border="0">he
|
||
self-creation of God. </i>For rational beings to choose to pursue
|
||
religious goals, however, is for ontological reason to choose to
|
||
transform itself into God. It is the prospect of a perfect being
|
||
inspires them to make this choice, but the perfect being in prospect
|
||
comes from reason itself, and thus, it comes from reason choosing to
|
||
do what is good because it contributes to the natural perfection of
|
||
the world as a whole. But since that is to act as the perfect being
|
||
that ontological reason intends to bring into existence, God already
|
||
exists in those actions. Thus, the belief in God is a self-fulfilling
|
||
belief. God creates Himself. And God continues to create Himself in
|
||
all the actions that are done in the interest of the world itself. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Even the
|
||
immanent God in a spatiomaterial world like ours would be <i>causa
|
||
sui</i>. God would create Himself, because ontological reason makes
|
||
itself into God by acting in the name of God. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>The
|
||
world as a rational being.</i> To pursue religious goals is, however,
|
||
to act for the good of the world as a whole, and thus, it is for the
|
||
world itself to be a rational being. That is, ontological reason
|
||
takes up the function of being the behavior guidance system for the
|
||
world itself, and thus, it does for the world what it does for the
|
||
spiritual animal and for the individual rational subject. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
the world does not become a rational being because it is a
|
||
reproducing organism like individuals and spiritual animals, imposing
|
||
natural selection on themselves by their own reproduction. But that
|
||
is merely to say that the world does become a rational being as a
|
||
direct result of natural selection, or biological reproductive
|
||
causation. It is due, instead, to the cultural evolution of practical
|
||
arguments by rational selection. The world acquires the power of
|
||
reason to do what contributes to the natural perfection of the world
|
||
itself, because the kind of natural perfection that inevitably comes
|
||
to exist within it includes rational beings who are able to
|
||
understand how the world is whole, who recognize themselves as a
|
||
necessary consequence of its nature, and who see how and why it is
|
||
good for them to act in the interest of the world as a whole. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>The
|
||
world as a perfect rational being.</i> Since this outcome is
|
||
inevitable, however, the world is not only a rational being, but a
|
||
perfect rational being. The nature of a spatiomaterial world like
|
||
ours makes it inevitable that evolution will begin, because as we
|
||
have seen, the effect of the cycle of night and day on the kinds of
|
||
molecules that exist on suitable planets is the existence of
|
||
reproductive cycles, which impose natural selection on themselves.
|
||
The course of evolution is inevitable, because, as we have seen, it
|
||
involves an inevitable series of evolutionary stages, each caused by
|
||
a higher level of part-whole complexity in the evolving structures of
|
||
reproductive organisms (taken broadly to include arguments that
|
||
reproduce within spiritual animals as primary structures). We have
|
||
seen how the inevitable outcome is ontological reason, that is,
|
||
rational beings who understand how the world is whole, who recognize
|
||
themselves as the inevitable outcome of evolution, and who inevitably
|
||
choose to pursue religious goals because they see how it would make
|
||
the world itself perfect. With reason acting as a behavior guidance
|
||
system in its interest, the world is a rational being. But since it
|
||
is an inevitable consequence of the nature of a spatiomaterial world
|
||
like ours, it is an expression of the essential nature of what
|
||
exists. The nature of the world is revealed, not only in the basic
|
||
nature of what exists, the essential natures of space and matter in
|
||
time and how they exist together as a world, but also in the nature
|
||
of what inevitably comes to exist from it. Thus, it turns out that
|
||
the world itself is perfect. And since the world is inevitably a
|
||
rational being, the world is a perfect rational being.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">What we
|
||
have been calling “natural perfection” are part-whole relations
|
||
that are optimal because of the basic nature of the world, but now we
|
||
find that that nature not only sets the standard of perfection, but
|
||
also measures up to it in the most complete way. In general, the
|
||
perfect makes the most out of the least. But the standard of
|
||
perfection appropriate to nature is fixed by the second law of
|
||
thermodynamics, because that makes it possible for structural causes
|
||
to use the thermodynamic flow of potential energy towards evenly
|
||
distributed heat to make things happen that would not otherwise
|
||
happen. Judged according to this standard, part-whole relations are
|
||
optimal when structural causes are combined in such a way that they
|
||
use the available free energy as efficiently as possible to control
|
||
as much of what happens in the world as possible. That is how to make
|
||
the most out of what exists in a world constituted by space and
|
||
matter enduring through time. And now we find that the basic nature
|
||
of the world not only sets the standard of natural perfection, but
|
||
also makes it inevitable that what happens in the world eventually
|
||
measures up to that standard as completely as possible. And it is
|
||
more complete than what is possible by natural selection alone,
|
||
because it uses a behavior guidance system that guides behavior to
|
||
what is good by recognizing how and why the good is good, even when
|
||
it does not control conditions that affect its own reproduction. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>The
|
||
world as God.</i> Since the world, because of its very nature,
|
||
inevitably becomes a perfect rational being, the world itself is God.
|
||
As ontological reason acknowledges its religious interest, it takes
|
||
responsibility for the world as a whole, doing what ought to be done
|
||
because it contributes to the natural perfection of the world as a
|
||
whole. That is the work of ontological reason in the world, to act
|
||
for the good of the world itself.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, it
|
||
will be possible for ontological reason to answer G. E. Moore’s
|
||
doubts about the possibility of any such naturalistic explanation of
|
||
the goodness of religious goals in the same way as it does his doubts
|
||
about the goodness of other goals. To a rational subject who
|
||
understands her nature as a rational subject and her place in the
|
||
natural world, including her identification with the world as much as
|
||
with her spiritual animal or her individual Self, it will simply does
|
||
not make sense to ask, But is contributing to the natural perfection
|
||
of the world good? She will know that it is contributing to her own
|
||
natural perfection and, thus, that it is good in the same way as her
|
||
other goals are good. Religious self interest will, therefore, take
|
||
its place, along with spiritual self interest and individual self
|
||
interest, as what determines the goals she will pursue. That is, they
|
||
all contribute to the natural perfection of reason. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The pursuit
|
||
of religious goals is also the wisdom that Socrates was seeking,
|
||
because this ontological explanation of the nature of goodness
|
||
explains why religious goals are good for the rational subject in a
|
||
way that will make him religious. The pursuit of religious goals is
|
||
good for him as a rational being, because it contributes to his own
|
||
natural perfection. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>A<img src="" name="OdnR_14" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="59" height="34" border="0">n
|
||
act of free will.</i> God comes into existence from an act of
|
||
self-creation, and though it is inevitable, it is an act of free
|
||
will. As we have seen, free will is autonomy, or the power that
|
||
reason gives individual subjects to do the good simply because they
|
||
know that it is good. The choice of ontological reason to pursue
|
||
religious goals is autonomous in that sense, because it comes from
|
||
the knowledge that it is good for rational beings to contribute what
|
||
only reason can contribute to the natural perfection of the world as
|
||
a whole. It is inevitable, but only because it really is good and
|
||
reason understands things so completely that it knows that it is
|
||
good. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">God’s
|
||
act of self-creation within a spatiomaterial world is free in the
|
||
same sense that Aquinas had in mind when he argued that God’s
|
||
choice to create the natural world was free. Aquinas was, of course,
|
||
talking about the traditional, transcendent God of epistemological
|
||
philosophy. But he wanted to deny that the existence of the natural
|
||
world is a necessary consequence of God’s nature, because that
|
||
would mean that it was not an act of free will. What Aquinas meant
|
||
can be expressed, I believe, by saying that God created the world
|
||
because He understood the nature of goodness. Because that
|
||
understanding enabled Him to see that it would be good to create the
|
||
world, He chose to create it because it is good. In the same sense,
|
||
it is by an act of free will that God creates Himself in a
|
||
spatiomaterial world: ontological reason understands the nature of
|
||
goodness and, by seeing that it would be good for God to exist,
|
||
chooses to create God because it is good. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">That
|
||
is also the sense in which practical reason, according to ontological
|
||
philosophy, cannot be reduced to theoretical reason. Since
|
||
ontological reason’s choice to pursue religious goals is
|
||
inevitable, the existence of God is among the necessary truths about
|
||
<i>What is </i>that reason can know by theoretical reason, that is,
|
||
in reason’s capacity as knower of the true. But that does not mean
|
||
that <i>What is </i>includes everything that holds necessarily <i>for
|
||
reason </i>because spatiomaterialism is the best ontological
|
||
explanation of the world, because <i>What is </i>is, in part, a
|
||
result of what ontological reason does. Reason creates God, that is,
|
||
transforms itself into God by acknowledging that is has a religious
|
||
self interest, as well as a spiritual and individual self interest.
|
||
<i>Doing</i> cannot, therefore, be eliminated in favor of <i>knowing</i>.
|
||
It is a product of ontological reason in its practical capacity.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In
|
||
explaining what happens before the evolution of ontological
|
||
philosophy, reason can be treated like any other evolving structure.
|
||
But when ontological philosophy evolves, that explanation becomes
|
||
part of what is evolving, and as ontological reason, it is the agent
|
||
whose practical reasoning brings about the subsequent course of
|
||
evolution. Ontological reason cannot sit back and simply contemplate
|
||
the existence of God, because the coming into existence of a perfect
|
||
rational being is the <i>doing </i>of reason. And it does what it
|
||
does, not because it recognizes its inevitability, but because what
|
||
it does is guided by <i>What ought to be. </i>In the end, therefore,
|
||
“ought” implies “is.”</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
the content of practical reason, including all the goals that ought
|
||
to be pursued, coincides, in part, with the content of theoretical
|
||
reason. Its necessary truths about <i>What is </i>include what reason
|
||
does inevitably in the world. But the diagram of the whole argument
|
||
of ontological philosophy does not misrepresent what holds
|
||
necessarily for reason by separating the conclusion about <i>What
|
||
ought to be </i>from the conclusions about <i>What is</i>, because
|
||
<i>for reason</i>, there is a difference between <i>knowing </i>and
|
||
<i>doing</i>. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
difference between theoretical and practical reason is nearly as
|
||
basic to reason as the difference between the ontological foundation
|
||
and the necessary truths that follow from it, which is represented in
|
||
a similarly fundamental way in the diagram of the whole argument. In
|
||
that case too, the content of necessary truths coincides with part of
|
||
the content of the ontological foundation, because the necessary
|
||
truths, being truths that follow from it, are implicit in it. But the
|
||
distinction is important <i>for reason</i>, because there is a
|
||
difference between what reason knows about the world empirically (by
|
||
an inference to the best ontological explanation of the world) and
|
||
what reason knows about the world prior to discovering what happens
|
||
in the world by experience. If there were no difference between
|
||
ontologically necessary truths (including conditionally ontologically
|
||
necessary truths) and ordinary empirical knowledge, ontology would
|
||
not be a new way of doing philosophy.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">God
|
||
is known first of all, therefore, as an intention of practical
|
||
reason, as the goal of ontological reason’s own plan of individual
|
||
and social level behavior in the world. That is the sense in which
|
||
practical reason is not reducible to theoretical reason. The creation
|
||
of God is the work of ontological reason in the world.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0; page-break-before: always">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">O<img src="" name="OdnR_15" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="136" height="41" border="0">ntological
|
||
philosophy entails, as we have seen, the existence of an immanent
|
||
God. But believers in a traditional religion, especially those who
|
||
believe in a transcendent God, are likely to be skeptical about the
|
||
world itself being sufficiently perfect to be worthy of worship. One
|
||
way to quell such doubts is to show that all the reasons for holding
|
||
that a transcendent God is worthy of worship are reasons that also
|
||
hold for the immanent God of ontological philosophy. That is possible
|
||
in this case because the points of disagreement about the nature of
|
||
God are not relevant to God's worthiness of worship. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">In
|
||
what follows, I will argue that the immanent God entailed by
|
||
spatiomaterialism is worthy of worship by arguing that it has all the
|
||
traits that are thought to make the traditional God of
|
||
epistemological philosophy worthy of worship. And since it will also
|
||
solve the theoretical problems that philosophical theology has
|
||
encountered trying to think about God coherently, it may even
|
||
convince traditional theists that such an immanent God is what they
|
||
have actually been believing in. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">This
|
||
is to give an ontological interpretation of Christianity, but a
|
||
similar argument can be constructed, I believe, for the beliefs of
|
||
all the other traditional religions. In their case as well, what
|
||
makes God worthy of worship is also implicit in this immanent God, as
|
||
would be shown by giving an ontological interpretation of them. That
|
||
is, at least, what ontological philosophy would expect, since
|
||
traditional religions are trying to grasp something about the world
|
||
that really is holy, but as through a glass darkly. However, only
|
||
Christian theology will be discussed in the following argument.
|
||
Christianity is the religion in which epistemological philosophy was
|
||
historically developed most fully, and though this critique of
|
||
Christian theology will suggest how it would work in other
|
||
traditional religious, I must leave that to others. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Let me
|
||
emphasize, however, that what I say here about Christianity is not
|
||
the result of a conversion experience on my part. I have not been
|
||
reborn by accepting Jesus as my savior. I long ago abandoned the
|
||
faith of my parents and left the church, because I could not believe
|
||
that naturalism is false, at least, not in the way required to
|
||
believe in a transcendent God. Nor could I believe that one discovers
|
||
the truth about such matters by an act of faith. However, in the long
|
||
process of working out this ontological explanation of the wholeness
|
||
of the world, I have become increasingly sympathetic with religion,
|
||
for I have slowly discovered that the wholeness of the world entails
|
||
the existence of a perfect being -- one that can be recognized as the
|
||
God referred to by Christian theology, because it has all the traits
|
||
that make the transcendent God of traditional Christianity worthy of
|
||
worship. Thus, all that Christians would have to give up in order to
|
||
recognize that ontological philosophy confirms what they want to
|
||
believe about the world are metaphysical beliefs that cause
|
||
theoretical problems — except possibly for the belief in personal
|
||
immortality, and I will argue that they would not really want that,
|
||
if they understood the nature of existence. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Some might,
|
||
therefore, claim that Jesus is a prophet of ontological philosophy.
|
||
But Jesus is not what leads reason to recognize the existence of God.
|
||
The path that leads to the explanation of the wholeness of the world
|
||
in its most complete sense is the path that Socrates was on. And that
|
||
is a path that began when the Pre-Socratic philosophers gave up
|
||
religious explanations of the world in favor of an ontological
|
||
explanation. Indeed, ontological philosophy is, I believe, the wisdom
|
||
that Socrates was seeking when he distinguished himself from the
|
||
sophists as a philosopher, that is, a <i>lover </i>of wisdom. It is
|
||
the knowledge of the nature of the world, including the nature of
|
||
goodness, that makes rational beings choose goals that are good
|
||
because they are good. That is, knowledge is virtue! The Socratic
|
||
principle is true. Thus, although the end of the road of reason is,
|
||
as I will argue, what Jesus was talking about, it is only reason, not
|
||
faith (and certainly not force), that can lead us there.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>The
|
||
doctrines of Christian theology. </i>What I take to be Christian
|
||
theology can be summed up as five doctrines. They are mainly the
|
||
doctrines that emerged in the medieval period. Many variations on
|
||
them and interpretations of them have been developed since then,
|
||
including some that take Christianity to be merely a mythical
|
||
representation of a moral code. But the more traditional Christian
|
||
beliefs about the nature of God and the meaning of life bring out
|
||
more clearly what is true in Christianity, according to this
|
||
ontological theology. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>God’s
|
||
transcendence of the natural world. </i>Christians (and Jews) have to
|
||
believe that God transcends the natural world, because He is supposed
|
||
to have created it by an act of free will. The natural world includes
|
||
everything in space and time, and thus, unless God were a substance
|
||
that exists outside space and time, He could not have created it. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>The
|
||
trinity.</i> The most distinctive tenet of Christian theology is,
|
||
perhaps, the doctrine of the trinity, that God is actually three
|
||
persons: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Father is the
|
||
creator of the natural world, who for some reason put human beings on
|
||
earth. The Son is the incarnation of God on earth whose sacrifice was
|
||
meant to earn the forgiveness of our sins so that believing that
|
||
Jesus is Christ would give us salvation from sin and eternal bliss.
|
||
Thus, God had to be at least two persons. But Christians also believe
|
||
that God acts in the world by way of the Holy Spirit as well, and
|
||
that is God as a third person. Thus, despite being a single
|
||
substance, God is supposed to be three persons, the Father, the Son
|
||
and the Holy Spirit (and theologians have struggled vainly to explain
|
||
how that is possible).</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Original
|
||
sin. </i>The source of evil in the world is supposed to be a result
|
||
of original sin. In the beginning, when Adam and Eve were in the
|
||
Garden of Eden, God forbad them to eat the fruit of the tree of the
|
||
knowledge of good and evil. But Adam and Eve had free will, and being
|
||
persuaded by a serpent, representing Satan (an angel in rebellion
|
||
against God), they ate the apple, thereby defying God’s command.
|
||
That was the original sin. As punishment, God banished Adam and Eve
|
||
from the Garden of Eden, and after the fall, they and all their
|
||
children and children's children became mortal beings. They were
|
||
ashamed of their bodies; they had to labor in order to live; they
|
||
were both agents and patients of such suffering as war; and they who
|
||
had to suffer famine and disease, as well as death. Thus, the evil in
|
||
the world is supposed to come from an act of free will in defiance of
|
||
God’s command. And their offspring would always be tempted to
|
||
choose evil and sin, because Adam and Eve had eaten the fruit of the
|
||
tree of the knowledge of good and evil. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>The
|
||
gospel.</i> Christians believe that the “good news” brought by
|
||
Jesus as the Christ, or savior, was that God had forgiven our sins,
|
||
including our original sin. It was possible, therefore, with the
|
||
grace of God, to avoid sin. This meant, according to Jesus, that the
|
||
kingdom of God is at hand and, since it would thereafter be possible
|
||
to avoid the evils that had plagued the descendants of Adam and Eve,
|
||
we would live in heaven forever. All that is required for this to
|
||
happen is that that we believe in Jesus as our savior, that we love
|
||
God, and that we love our neighbors as ourselves, that is, a
|
||
conversion to Christianity. Though only faith in Christ is required
|
||
for salvation from sin, it is the struggle to overcome sin and evil
|
||
that is the basic meaning of life, according to Christianity.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Immortality.</i>
|
||
When Jesus was crucified, God sacrificed his only Son, and the
|
||
divinity of Jesus was shown by his resurrection from the dead after
|
||
three days and his bodily ascension into Heaven some while later,
|
||
joining his Father. The reward of believing in Christ is salvation
|
||
from sin, and according to the traditional Christian belief, that
|
||
means having eternal life in the presence of God, that is, in heaven.
|
||
Thus, Christianity holds that everyone has an immortal soul in the
|
||
sense that each person is a substance that lives after the death of
|
||
their bodies on earth. For the saved, that means living eternally in
|
||
the presence of God, and heaven is thought to transcend the natural
|
||
world, just as God Himself does. But the eternal fate of our souls
|
||
depends on our free will, that is, whether we choose to believe in
|
||
Christ. Those who do not are not saved, and their immortal souls
|
||
spend eternity in Hell, deprived of God’s presence. Thus, what is
|
||
at stake in the choice one makes about how to live one’s life is
|
||
the fate of one’s eternal soul.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>An
|
||
ontological interpretation of Christian doctrines.</i> God is
|
||
immanent, according to ontological philosophy, because it implies
|
||
that the world itself is a perfect being. The basic nature of a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours gives rise to progressive evolution,
|
||
and that eventually leads to the existence of perfect rational
|
||
beings, who act for the good of the world as a whole. That is our
|
||
foundation for explaining what is true and what is false in the
|
||
doctrines of Christian theism. Insofar as the beliefs that make the
|
||
Christian transcendent God worthy of worship can be explained by our
|
||
immanent God, Christians must admit that this pantheistic God is also
|
||
worthy of their worship. Nor can Christians deny that this immanent
|
||
God is worthy of their worship, if the ways in which it contradicts
|
||
traditional theism are not what make their transcendent God worthy of
|
||
worship. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This way of
|
||
showing that the pantheistic God of ontological philosophy is worthy
|
||
of worship is, of course, an <i>ad hominum </i>argument for
|
||
Christians. It will not persuade everyone, because non-Christians may
|
||
deny that even the Christian God is worthy of worship. But that is
|
||
not necessary, since we have already seen that ontological reason
|
||
acknowledge a religious reason. But it will show how ontological
|
||
reason can be seen as taking up where Christianity (and religion
|
||
generally) leaves off, enabling rational beings to have from reason
|
||
something more than what Christians had to take on faith.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">I will take
|
||
up each of the traditional doctrines of Christianity and offer what
|
||
seems to me to be the most sympathetic interpretation of them from
|
||
the standpoint of ontological philosophy. But I will leave the first
|
||
doctrine, about the transcendence of God, to the last.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdnR_19" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="118" height="26" border="0">he
|
||
central doctrine from which Christianity derives its name is the
|
||
belief that Jesus was Christ, the Son of God. The doctrine of the
|
||
incarnation of God is problematic, because it means that one and the
|
||
same substances that created the natural world must also be
|
||
particular substance in that world. It is hard to explain how a
|
||
single substance can be two such different persons, but if God must
|
||
be two persons, it is not much more implausible to suppose that there
|
||
are three altogether. Indeed, Christianity assumes that, in addition
|
||
to the transcendent Father and bodily Son, God exists in a third
|
||
form, as the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is supposed to do God’s
|
||
work on earth. Thus, the doctrine of the trinity holds that, even
|
||
though God is a single substance, He is three different persons: the
|
||
Father, who created the natural world and sent his Son to save us;
|
||
the Son, who brought the father's word to the world; and the Holy
|
||
Spirit, who does God's work. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
|
||
seems to some that the doctrine of the trinity is self-contradictory,
|
||
and though believers are willing to believe that it is just another
|
||
mystery that lies beyond the understanding of finite rational beings,
|
||
the immanent God entailed by spatiomaterialism suggests a solution to
|
||
that mystery. It is possible for finite rational beings to understand
|
||
how the three persons of God are a single substance, because in a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like our own, that substance could be the whole
|
||
world. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is
|
||
possible to explain what is meant by "God, the Father,"for
|
||
that could be the basic nature of the world. That is what is
|
||
responsible for the existence of beings like us in the world, for it
|
||
is the ontological cause of the evolutionary process by which a
|
||
rational beings come to exist in the world. Since what evolves in the
|
||
culture of philosophical spiritual animals is the knowledge that
|
||
provides makes heaven on earth possible. The word of God can be seen
|
||
as what is spoken by rational subjects with ontological reason, and
|
||
thus, they can be seen as what is meant by "God as the Son."
|
||
That is, the individual's knowledge of the truth about the wholeness
|
||
of the world, including the nature of goodness, is the knowledge of
|
||
the word of the Father, which Christ was supposed to have. And the
|
||
"Holy Spirit" refers to the spiritual animal that exists
|
||
when the word of the Father is known, because when ontological
|
||
philosophy evolves, reason understands the wholeness of the world,
|
||
and by acknowledging its religious interest, ontological reason does
|
||
God’s work, the work of becoming a perfect rational being, that is,
|
||
God’s self-creation. Thus, all three persons of God can be seen as
|
||
aspects of the same perfect substance, namely, the world as a whole. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">It
|
||
might seem that, although ontological philosophy can explain how a
|
||
single substance can have all three aspects, it does not quite
|
||
explain the doctrine of the Trinity, because it does not show that
|
||
they are all persons. Individuals are clearly persons, because they
|
||
are rational beings. And since spiritual animals are rational beings,
|
||
they can also be called persons. But even if the basic nature of a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours is perfect in the sense of giving rise
|
||
to natural perfection, the world as a whole is hardly a person. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This
|
||
objection overlooks, however, a consequence of ontological reason
|
||
acting in the interest of the world as a whole. When reason takes on
|
||
the function of being the behavior guidance system for the world
|
||
itself, the world itself becomes a rational being. And since rational
|
||
beings are persons, the world is a person. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In other
|
||
words, the reason that there are three <i>persons </i>of God is that
|
||
ontological reason has three practical interests, individual,
|
||
spiritual and religious. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">These three
|
||
rational beings are a single substance in the sense that they are all
|
||
constituted by space and matter, the substances whose existence
|
||
explains the existence of everything else in the world. The
|
||
difference between them is that they are rational beings on different
|
||
levels of part-whole complexity in space. The Son refers to each of
|
||
the rational subjects who are parts of spiritual animals after
|
||
ontological reason evolves. The Holy Spirit includes the spiritual
|
||
animal (or all the spiritual animals) whose behavior is guided by
|
||
ontological reason to do what is good for the world as a whole. And
|
||
the Father is the whole world to whose natural perfection religious
|
||
goals contribute. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
what is affected by the activities of the Son and the Holy Spirit may
|
||
extend no farther than their own planetary system. But that does not
|
||
mean that it is not a contribution to the natural perfection of the
|
||
world as a whole. It does make the whole world more perfect than it
|
||
would be without ontological reason, and it happens throughout the
|
||
universe, since because perfect rational beings evolve on every
|
||
suitable planetary system. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
|
||
most telling objection to traditional pantheism is that it is
|
||
incompatible with God being a person, but that does not tell against
|
||
the kind of pantheism entailed by ontological philosophy. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The God of
|
||
ontological theology is a person, because He has the nature of a
|
||
rational being. Even though ontological philosophy takes the world as
|
||
a whole to be God, that is compatible with God being a person,
|
||
because the world itself has behavior that is guided to do what is
|
||
good for it by rational subjects who do what as good for the world as
|
||
part of their self interest. That is not incompatible with God being
|
||
a rational agent that also has an individual and spiritual self
|
||
interest. Indeed, even if Christianity had not believed in the
|
||
Trinity, ontological philosophy would still have had to recognize
|
||
something surprisingly similar to it, because a spatiomaterial world
|
||
like ours necessarily has rational subjects with an individual,
|
||
spiritual and rational self interest. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">I<img src="" name="OdnR_17" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="118" height="26" border="0">t
|
||
is even possible for ontological philosophy to confirm the
|
||
traditional Christian view of original sin as the source of evil in
|
||
the world and, thereby, understand its view of the meaning of life.
|
||
But since its interpretation of that doctrine locates original sin in
|
||
the larger context of evolution, it avoids the problems that the
|
||
existence of evil has posed for traditional theism.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Original
|
||
sin can be explained as war. Accordingly, the Garden of Eden would
|
||
represent the innocent life of higher primates or first hominids. War
|
||
was an inevitable evil, because this means that the serpent that
|
||
talked Adam and Eve into disobeying God's command was the evolution
|
||
of natural sentences (rather than an angel rebelling against God,
|
||
which is, in any case, difficult to reconcile with God's omnipotence.
|
||
The use of language made war a possible means for groups of hominids
|
||
to overcome the scarcity caused by the reproduction of spiritual
|
||
animals, and it can even be seen as a "violation" of God's
|
||
command in the sense that groups of nonlinguistic animals are
|
||
apparently unable to evolve the behavior of killing other groups of
|
||
animals from their own species in order to acquire food. But the
|
||
evolution of war in spiritual animals was inevitable, and the advent
|
||
of war can be seen as banishing them from the Garden of Eden, for it
|
||
forced them to live in a dangerous world indeed. To fight wars was,
|
||
furthermore, to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good
|
||
and evil, because as we have seen, the group-level selection pressure
|
||
imposed by warfare led to the evolution of reason. Though the
|
||
original function of reason was to choose more reliably between war
|
||
and peace, that became, as reason evolved, the more general choice
|
||
between good and evil, because reason had to enable members of
|
||
spiritual animals to live at peace with one another. Evil is what is
|
||
at stake in morality, because individuals had the option of
|
||
intentionally harming others as a means to their ends, and from their
|
||
adaptation to war, they even had desires that made it possible to
|
||
enjoy killing other members of their own species. Reason discovered
|
||
moral rules that limited the pursuit of their interests, and it gave
|
||
them autonomy, or free will, that is, the ability to resist even the
|
||
strongest animal desire and do what they believe is good and right.
|
||
But it was an imperfect mechanism, and moral evil was an inevitable
|
||
apart of the world. Thus, their fate was to be both the agent and
|
||
patient of harm done intentionally, both war and moral trespasses
|
||
against other individuals — not to mention bearing the burden of
|
||
the labor involved in the evolution spiritual animals. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Ontological
|
||
philosophy can, therefore, confirm, in a way, the traditional
|
||
doctrine of original sin. But what is more, ontological theology
|
||
solves other problems that Christian theology faces about the nature
|
||
of evil. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">One problem
|
||
with the doctrine of original sin is the inability to explain why God
|
||
would create beings with a free will who He knew would disobey Him.
|
||
That is supposed to be part of God’s mysterious purpose and, thus,
|
||
beyond human understanding. And even though Christians believe that
|
||
God ultimately would forgive them their original sin, making
|
||
salvation possible, there is no explanation why, generation after
|
||
generation, the fate of their immortal souls should depend on the
|
||
choices they make on earth. That was still part of the mystery. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Another
|
||
problem is the fact that evil exists at all, for that argues against
|
||
the existence of a supernatural God. That is the so-called “problem
|
||
of evil.” If God created a world that contains evil, then either
|
||
(1) God must not be absolutely good, (2) God must not be all-knowing,
|
||
or (3) God must not be all-powerful. God must lack at least one of
|
||
these three traditional perfections. There is some plausibility to
|
||
the claim that the existence of moral evil is necessary on the
|
||
grounds that evil will be done as long as there are beings who have
|
||
both free will and the capacity to do evil, and that cannot be
|
||
avoided, if the existence of human beings in a world like our serves
|
||
some higher purpose that God in creating the natural world in the
|
||
first place. But it is still a mystery why the existence of finite
|
||
beings with free will is good or makes the natural world good. And
|
||
even if there is some such explanation of moral evil, there is still
|
||
no explanation why natural evil, such as famine, disease, and
|
||
earthquakes, should be part of God's plan. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Ontological
|
||
theology, however, solves both these problems. Evil does not show
|
||
that an immanent God must lack any of the personal perfections of
|
||
God, because the world as a perfect rational being will do everything
|
||
that can be done to avoid evil in the world. It is just that the evil
|
||
that occurs in evolution is not something that can be avoided,
|
||
because that is how perfect rational beings come to exist. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Ontological
|
||
philosophy also explains, therefore, why there are beings with free
|
||
will who must struggle against original sin in order to avoid evil.
|
||
War and the evolution of reason is an inevitable stage in the
|
||
evolution of spiritual animals. Furthermore, this explanation reveals
|
||
why the existence of such rational beings is good: it makes a
|
||
necessary contribution to the natural perfection of life, the natural
|
||
perfection of evolutionary change, and in the end, to the evolution
|
||
of perfect rational beings in the world. No being who lacks the power
|
||
to do evil can be an all-powerful being. The progressiveness of
|
||
evolution, therefore, compensates for the moral evil that exists in
|
||
the world. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Finally,
|
||
even the natural evil that exists in the world is compensated.
|
||
Nothing can be good without evil, because evil is necessary for
|
||
evolution. The scarcity caused as reproductive cycles multiply is
|
||
evil, by our definition of "good", because it detracts from
|
||
the natural perfection of which it is part. But such evil is
|
||
compensated. There would be no natural perfection and, thus, no
|
||
goodness without it, because that is how reproductive cycles impose
|
||
natural selection on themselves and propel evolution along. Likewise,
|
||
since disease is a necessary consequence of the evolution of
|
||
organisms at lower levels of biological organization, it makes a
|
||
contribution to the natural perfection of the ecology. Death is a
|
||
necessary part of the structure of the reproductive cycles of
|
||
multicellular animals and, thus, of subsequent evolution. And even
|
||
natural catastrophes, like the impact of asteroids, play a necessary
|
||
role, because they alter conditions so radically that inherently more
|
||
powerful organisms can replace inherently less powerful incumbents in
|
||
ecological niches. That is, after all, how mammals replaced dinosaurs
|
||
in the most energy rich ecological niches some 65 million years ago. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">N<img src="" name="OdnR_18" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="118" height="27" border="0">ot
|
||
only does the belief in an immanent God make it possible to see a
|
||
truth in the Christian belief about the meaning of life -- that it is
|
||
the struggle for salvation from original sin -- but it can also be
|
||
seen as confirming the “glad tidings” taught by Jesus about
|
||
eventual success. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Grace.
|
||
</i>The “good news” was that God has forgiven us our sins, and
|
||
according to ontological philosophy, Christians are right to believe
|
||
that salvation from original sin is possible. Indeed, it can even be
|
||
said to depend on the grace of God, although the grace of God must be
|
||
understood, not as a gift of forgiveness of sin by a transcendent
|
||
God, but rather as the fact that the nature of the world makes
|
||
perfection possible for spiritual animals and their members. It is
|
||
possible in the end to control population growth and arrange human
|
||
affairs so that wars do not occur and human beings are not even
|
||
tempted to do evil to one another. Indeed, that is part of the
|
||
natural perfection of the world itself that ontological reason
|
||
undertakes to bring about when it acknowledges its religious
|
||
interest. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Heaven.</i>
|
||
Salvation from sin means that the kingdom of God is at hand and that
|
||
we shall have eternal life in heaven. What Jesus saw was the kind of
|
||
natural perfection that is possible for beings like us, who can see
|
||
into one another minds and act together in pursuing goals. Jesus was
|
||
right to insist that what it involves is loving God and loving one’s
|
||
neighbor, for that is what is involved in pursuing religious goals.
|
||
But according to ontological theology, heaven will be at hand only
|
||
when ontological reason acknowledges its religious interest and
|
||
pursues goals because they make the world as a whole naturally
|
||
perfect. And in that heaven, there will be eternal life. Once a
|
||
perfect rational being exists, reason can go on pursuing goals that
|
||
are in individual, spiritual and religious interest forever, because
|
||
spiritual animals can live as long as the world. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>Belief
|
||
in Christ.</i> Salvation is supposed to be the result of believing in
|
||
Christ, that is, believing that He is the Son of god and following
|
||
his commandments to love God and our neighbors as ourselves. But
|
||
Jesus was mistaken to believe that all that heaven requires is a
|
||
change of heart, a conversion to Christianity. Heaven will exist only
|
||
when original sin is overcome, and according to this naturalistic
|
||
ontological interpretation of his gospel, that requires the labor of
|
||
reason, though cultural evolution and history. When Jesus taught his
|
||
vision of perfection, there was still much more for reason to learn
|
||
before it could understand the wholeness of the world. And once that
|
||
is understood, reason still must do God’s work by, among other
|
||
things, controlling the causes of war and controlling the causes of
|
||
the moral evil that individuals do to one another. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">On this
|
||
interpretation of Christian theology, therefore, the significance of
|
||
the belief that Christ is God become man is that it is possible for
|
||
rational subjects like us to understand the word of God and create
|
||
heaven on earth. That is, Jesus represents the fate of rational
|
||
subjects generally. It happens during the philosophical stage of
|
||
spiritual evolution when reason finally understands how the world is
|
||
whole, sees itself as the inevitable outcome of evolution, and by
|
||
understanding the nature of goodness, understands how and why it is
|
||
good for reason to pursue goals that are good for the world as a
|
||
whole. As ontological reason acknowledges its religious interest and
|
||
does the work of creating God, original sin is overcome and eternal
|
||
life in heaven begins. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In sum,
|
||
salvation depends, not on faith, but on reason. The incarnation of
|
||
God is that rational subjects have the kind of understanding that God
|
||
was supposed to have when he created the natural world. It is, in
|
||
effect, to understand God's purpose in creating the world. And that
|
||
is what makes it possible to create heaven on Earth.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">T<img src="" name="OdnR_20" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="118" height="25" border="0">he
|
||
promise of eternal life in the presence of God may seem to be where
|
||
ontological philosophy fails to explain Christian theology, because
|
||
it must deny that rational subjects have immortal souls. The immortal
|
||
soul is supposed to be a substance that continues to endure though
|
||
time after the body decays. But except for the matter and space that
|
||
constituted the body, there is no such substance, and thus, there can
|
||
be no life after death. That does not mean, however, that ontological
|
||
philosophy must deny the promise of eternal life in heaven. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Though they
|
||
are not immortal as individuals, rational beings can and will be
|
||
immortal as a spiritual animal. Spiritual animals can be immortal,
|
||
because they do not reproduce by the sexual mixing of parts of their
|
||
structures, like eukaryotes. They reproduce by division, like
|
||
prokaryotes. The same spiritual animal can continue to exist
|
||
indefinitely, and that is what begins when reason evolves into God.
|
||
The perfect rational being that comes to exist on earth as the
|
||
outcome of evolution is the existence of God in the world, and that
|
||
is eternal life in heaven. The immortality of the spiritual animal is
|
||
a kind of immortality for the rational subject, because the spiritual
|
||
animal is an aspect of the self in whose interest the rational
|
||
subject acts. Indeed, the <i>world itself </i>as a whole is an aspect
|
||
of the self in whose interest the rational subject acts, once the
|
||
world becomes a perfect rational being in that sense. The immortality
|
||
of the spiritual animal and the world are way in which the self live
|
||
on after the death of the individual body. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
|
||
the individual must eventually die. Since rational subjects are
|
||
multicellular animals, they cannot live without going through
|
||
reproductive cycles in which they are born and die. But the life of
|
||
the rational subject as an individual multicellular animal is not the
|
||
only life she has, because she is, as a rational being with
|
||
ontological reason, the agent who guides the behavior of her
|
||
spiritual animal and even the world itself, not just her own body.
|
||
That is, the self in whose interest she acts is not just the
|
||
individual, but also the spiritual animal and the world, and her
|
||
spiritual and divine self are immortal. That is how the rational
|
||
subject has life after death.</font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Ontological
|
||
philosophy does imply, nevertheless, that rational subjects do not
|
||
continue to live as individuals after the death of the body, and this
|
||
is not what Christians believe about how their souls are immortal. It
|
||
may, however, be closer to what Jesus himself actually meant, because
|
||
as a Jew, the kind of salvation that he probably believed the Messiah
|
||
would bring was heaven on Earth. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US">The
|
||
belief that salvation takes the form of immortal souls in an
|
||
otherworldly heaven could have been what the earliest followers of
|
||
Jesus came to believe in order to avoid losing their faith in Jesus’
|
||
message when he was crucified. If they expected the kingdom of God to
|
||
begin immediately on earth, his death would suggest that Jesus was
|
||
simply mistaken. But it was possible to continue to believe that
|
||
Jesus' followers would have eternal life in heaven, even though it
|
||
did not happen on earth, if it meant having immortal souls that live
|
||
in the presence of God in a transcendent realm. That would be the
|
||
significance of the resurrection and ascension, and it would be
|
||
another distortion caused by the belief in a transcendent God. (For a
|
||
defense of such a view, see Thomas </span></font></font><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/ObjText/#Sheehan"><font color="#0000ff"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US"><u>Sheehan</u></span></font></font></a><font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US">,
|
||
1986.) </span></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Though
|
||
ontological philosophy must deny that rational subjects have immortal
|
||
lives as individuals, that does not mean that its immanent God is any
|
||
less worthy of worship than the traditional Christian God. It merely
|
||
reflects the difference in what rational beings really want that
|
||
comes from understanding the nature of existence. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In a world
|
||
constituted by space and matter, the immortality of bodily existence
|
||
is not a good thing. Rational subjects who understand their nature
|
||
ontologically as inevitable products of evolution by reproductive
|
||
causation will not want to be immortal as individual multicellular
|
||
animals. They will recognize that the desire to have an immortal soul
|
||
is a form of narcissism, an unhealthy kind of "selfishness."
|
||
</font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is
|
||
possible to extend lives, and that will be done, because it is good.
|
||
Life is not currently long enough to make the most of it. And it will
|
||
probably also be possible to make the body immortal in the sense that
|
||
it will not die of old age or disease, but only by accident. But it
|
||
would not be good to make the body immortal, because the natural
|
||
perfection of the rational subject as an individual requires a
|
||
temporal limit to life. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The life of
|
||
an individual is a process of growth. She starts out as a baby, only
|
||
later acquiring the capacity for reflection, and she goes through a
|
||
process of development and growth that continues throughout life,
|
||
until death. What makes the maximum holistic power of the
|
||
multicellular animal <i>holistic </i>is that it controls all the
|
||
conditions that affect reproduction over the whole cycle. That is the
|
||
way to make the most of the least in the case of the individual
|
||
animal. The parts that fit together as such an optimal whole are
|
||
mainly the rational actions that make up the life as a
|
||
four-dimensional object, and the individual gains power to control
|
||
relevant conditions in the process of growing older. One acquires
|
||
practical wisdom as time is running out. The self one constructs is
|
||
like a painting, as I suggested earlier, that is painted from left to
|
||
right on the canvas, trying to make the most of every part of the
|
||
life. That each moment make its own essential contribution to the
|
||
perfection of the whole -- that is, that it not be redundant -- is a
|
||
essential aspect of the structure of the natural perfection of the
|
||
individual animal. If life did not terminate at some point, there
|
||
would be no whole of which the parts are all parts and thus no
|
||
possibility of a natural perfection about it. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Or to put
|
||
it negatively, growth is such an essential part of the structure of
|
||
the natural perfection of individual life that the worst hell that a
|
||
reflective subject with ontological reason could imagine is to have
|
||
grown as much as possible for beings of her kind and yet be unable to
|
||
die. Even if she were in perfect health and in possession of her
|
||
faculties, it would become boring to go on living, because in a world
|
||
made of space and matter, there is a limit to how much an rational
|
||
subject can do and learn and enjoy. After she had passed that limit
|
||
far enough, it would be torture to wake up each day and know that it
|
||
would just another repetition of something already experienced many
|
||
times before. Fortunately, such a condition is not possible for
|
||
rational subjects with behavior guidance systems based on brains. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif">G<img src="" name="OdnR_16" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="10" width="118" height="26" border="0">od’s
|
||
transcendence of the natural world.</font> Christians believe that
|
||
God transcends the natural world, and that seems to be an aspect of
|
||
traditional theology that ontological philosophy must deny. But
|
||
transcendence is not relevant to God's worthiness of worship, for it
|
||
is simply what Christians had to believe in order to believe that God
|
||
is responsible for their own existence and the source of purpose in
|
||
the world. Ontological philosophy makes it possible to see God as the
|
||
creator in the latter sense without transcending the natural world. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Christian
|
||
believe that God created the natural world out of nothing. It is the
|
||
role of God as the Father to call into existence by an act of will
|
||
the natural world and the teleological order it involves, including
|
||
human beings. But if God as the Father is the basic nature of a
|
||
spatiomaterial world like ours, as ontological philosophy implies,
|
||
God is still the source of human beings and all the purpose in the
|
||
world. That is, God is still the creator of the natural world in the
|
||
relevant sense, and thus, such an immanent God is no less worthy of
|
||
worship than the transcendent God of traditional Christian theology.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">An immanent
|
||
God cannot create the world as act of will. But the world can, and
|
||
does, by the very nature of what exists in it, give rise to the
|
||
existence of rational beings like us. It is our “creator” in the
|
||
sense of being the source of our existence. To be sure, since we are
|
||
a necessary consequence of its nature, we are not something done from
|
||
the knowledge of the nature of goodness, that is, created as an act
|
||
of free will. But the nature of the world gives rise to us as part of
|
||
the process by which it gives rise to natural perfection and a real
|
||
difference between good and bad in the world. Thus, even though God
|
||
is not a substance existing outside space and time that gives rise to
|
||
a world of objects in space that change through time, God turns out
|
||
to be the cause of our human world and the source of real difference
|
||
between good and bad. Hence, an immanent God is no less awesome. Nor
|
||
is such an immanent God any less beneficent, that is, “good-doing,”
|
||
though, of course, He cannot be benevolent, that is, “good-willing,”
|
||
except through God’s self creation as a perfect rational being. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Simply
|
||
being immanent does not make God any less a perfect rational being
|
||
than a transcendent God. To be sure, an immanent God does not know as
|
||
much and is not as powerful as it seems a transcendent God would be.
|
||
But that does not make an immanent God any less worthy of worship,
|
||
because it does not imply that an immanent God is inferior to a
|
||
transcendent God. It is merely a difference is the conception of
|
||
perfection that comes from one's conception of the nature of
|
||
existence. The kind of perfect knowledge and power that is
|
||
conceivable in a substance that exists outside space and time is
|
||
different from the kind of perfect knowledge and power that is
|
||
conceivable in something made of space and matter in time. But that
|
||
does not show that one is better than the other, for it is just a
|
||
question of which ontology is true of the actual world. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Finally, if
|
||
there is a difference in perfection, there is one way in which an
|
||
immanent God is more perfect than a transcendent God. Both are alike
|
||
in having something permanent and unchanging about them. A
|
||
transcendent God is unchanging because He outside of time, whereas an
|
||
immanent God is unchanging because He is constituted by substances
|
||
that endure through time with the same essential natures and they
|
||
inevitably give rise to perfect rational beings. But since a
|
||
transcendent God is outside time, He cannot change at all. Thus, He
|
||
lacks at least one perfection that an immanent God can have, namely,
|
||
the natural perfection of change itself. When evolution is change in
|
||
the direction of natural perfection, as we have seen, each moment in
|
||
the existence of the world makes a unique and necessary contribution
|
||
to the existence of a perfect rational being in the world. Time is
|
||
another way in which parts may be combined optimally as a whole, and
|
||
a transcendent God is deprived of it. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">God’s
|
||
transcendence of the natural world is not, therefore, what makes Him
|
||
worthy of reverence. Rather, transcendence marks Him as the God of
|
||
epistemological philosophy. Though Christianity inherited the belief
|
||
that God is the creator of the natural world from Judaism, His
|
||
transcendence of the natural world is explained in Christian theology
|
||
in a way that depends on Western philosophy. Ever since Augustine, at
|
||
least, it has been explained in terms of Plato’s dualism of
|
||
Becoming and Being (albeit by way of its transformation into a more
|
||
idealist, neo-Platonist metaphysics by Plotinus). Plato first used
|
||
the dichotomy between naturalistic and subjectivistic understanding
|
||
(together with the radically different phenomenal appearances of the
|
||
objects of each form of understanding) to explain what is good in the
|
||
natural world as deriving from a supernatural source. And deriving
|
||
from a form of metaphysical dualism that results from the
|
||
epistemological approach to philosophy, it is not surprising that the
|
||
belief in a transcendent God leads to serious theoretical problems.
|
||
The problems are all solved by ontological theology.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>The
|
||
Problem of Proving God's Existence. </i>The most immediate problem of
|
||
traditional theology is proving God's existence. The dualism entailed
|
||
by realism in epistemological philosophy usually leads, as we have
|
||
seen, to doubts about realism, or anti-realism, and in the case of
|
||
Christian theism, that means atheism. The transcendence of God makes
|
||
it impossible to prove His existence from within space and time. But
|
||
it is possible, as we have seen, to prove the existence of an
|
||
immanent God, for this is a spatiomaterial world of the right kind. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
|
||
metaphysical dualisms of epistemological philosophy are inherently
|
||
problematic. Plato could not explain adequately how two such
|
||
different substances as Being and Becoming are related as parts of
|
||
the same world. Christianity escapes being embarrassed by that
|
||
problem only by insisting that the relationship is just part of the
|
||
mystery about God. Though as persons (or rational beings), we are
|
||
supposed to be created in the image of God, we are finite rational
|
||
beings, and thus, we must simply accept the mystery and have faith in
|
||
God. But the mysteriousness of God cannot, as such, make God worthy
|
||
of worship. At best, the mystery merely leaves the possibility that
|
||
God will turn out to be holy. And at worst, it is a mask that could
|
||
just as well be worn by an evil or contemptible being and faith could
|
||
be our undoing. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>The
|
||
Problem of God's Foreknowledge. </i>Nor does the dualism of God and
|
||
nature escape the theoretical problems inherent in a Platonic
|
||
metaphysics. For example, God, being perfect, is supposed to be
|
||
omniscient, as well as omnipotent and absolutely good. But since He
|
||
exists outside of time as the creator of the natural world, He
|
||
creates all the moments in the history of the natural world at once,
|
||
including everything that finite rational beings ever do. Thus, God
|
||
must already know what each individual will choose in each situation
|
||
she faces. But that is hard to reconcile with the belief that
|
||
individuals have a free will and that what becomes of us and the
|
||
world is the result of our doing it. The future is not open. It is
|
||
always already determined what we will do. Thus, God’s
|
||
foreknowledge of what will happen seems to deny that rational
|
||
subjects are free to choose in the way they think they are. </font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">No such
|
||
problem arises from the belief that God is immanent, even though God
|
||
is still a perfect rational being, including omniscience, because
|
||
knowing everything that it is possible to know as a rational being
|
||
constituted space and matter does not include knowing what every
|
||
rational being will ever do. It is possible to know what individuals
|
||
have done in the past. And it is possible to know what will happen in
|
||
the long run because of global regularities. But there are no
|
||
necessary truths about what rational beings will choose in particular
|
||
situations. That is among the contingent details that can be known
|
||
only through experience of the world. (Nor is there any reason to
|
||
believe that actual choices can be predicted by knowing how the bits
|
||
of matter constituting a rational subject are moving and
|
||
interacting.) In any case, since what exists are substances that
|
||
endure through time, the future is open in the sense that it depends
|
||
on what we choose to do (along with what else is happening at the
|
||
time). Thus, the belief in an immanent God solves the traditional
|
||
problem about God’s omniscience imply foreknowledge of our choices.
|
||
</font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Nothing
|
||
that Christians must give up, if they accept the foundation of
|
||
ontological philosophy and accepts the necessary truths that follow
|
||
from it, shows that the immanent God entailed by spatiomaterialism is
|
||
any less worthy of worship than their traditional God. What changes
|
||
is one's conception of the nature of existence, and that has
|
||
implications about the nature of perfection that can be conceived in
|
||
such a world. Thus, even though ontological philosophy must deny that
|
||
God transcends the natural world, that does not mean that there is no
|
||
perfect being, for as it turns out in a spatiomaterial world like
|
||
ours, the world itself is as perfect a perfect being as can be
|
||
conceived to be made of space and matter. And that perfect being is
|
||
demonstrably worthy of worship, if the God of traditional Christian
|
||
theology is. Indeed, ontological theology would have to include the
|
||
doctrine of the trinity, quite apart from Christian theology, because
|
||
the ultimate perfection of the world comes from how perfect rational
|
||
subjects have three kinds of self interest: individual, spiritual and
|
||
religious. Far from denying the doctrine of original sin, ontological
|
||
philosophy clarifies what it is. With that clarification of original
|
||
sin is, it not only confirms the Christian belief about the meaning
|
||
of life being the struggle to overcome sin, but it points the way to
|
||
overcoming it. Salvation is surely no less valuable for being
|
||
achieved by reason rather than by faith. The denial of personal
|
||
immortality may seem to be a sticking point for some, but the
|
||
desirability of immortality is an illusion that comes from failing to
|
||
recognize the basic nature of the life of individual reflective
|
||
subjects, for when it is understood ontologically, its natural
|
||
perfection precludes immortality. Indeed, it would be hell, and as it
|
||
turns out, there is no hell, according to ontological theology. </font></font></font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="western" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
|
||
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">If,
|
||
therefore, the Christian God is worthy of worship, the perfect
|
||
rational being that the world turns out to be, according to
|
||
ontological philosophy, is no less worthy of worship. On the
|
||
contrary, the insights into the nature of God make Him more worthy of
|
||
worship. Not only is it possible to know about God without a leap of
|
||
faith, but it is possible for reason to know what work it is that
|
||
needs to be done in the name of God.</font></font></font></p>
|
||
<div id="sdendnote1">
|
||
<p lang="en-US" class="sdendnote" style="margin-bottom: 0.25cm"><font color="#000000"><a class="sdendnotesym" name="sdendnote1sym" href="#sdendnote1anc">i</a>
|
||
Moore is not unaware of this aspect of goodness. According to his
|
||
principle of organic unities, (<i>Principia Ethica</i>, Ch. 1, Sec.
|
||
18-23) a whole may have an intrinsic value different in amount from
|
||
the sum of the values of its parts. </font>
|
||
</p>
|
||
</div>
|
||
</body>
|
||
</html> |