If you’re a leader or a thought leader, this could be the place for you. This episode is the first in The Quest for Spirituality series by Dorian Scott Cole.
(Listen to the Podcast instead.)
Millennials and Generation Z today long for authentic spiritual connections. They tend to be separatists who blame organized religion for upholding the status quo that has harmed many people and the world. I appreciate them – I’m the same but from a different era.
(The Quest for Spiritual image created by Dall-e-2 inspired by thousands of images on the Internet.)
I’ve never accepted the world as it is. My thought is always that we can do better. But change comes slowly and sometimes painfully. Improvement isn't just about changing, it's about making the world better. To me making the world better is a spiritual quest. But lets drill down on that for a moment.
Do we really understand what spiritual is? For some it’s vilified as some spooky thing cluttered with falsehoods and evil spirits, spiritualism, anti-religion, or superstitious nonsense. There is a different aspect embraced by a wider group. Since the Eleventh Century, "Spirituality" began to denote the mental aspect of life, as opposed to the material and sensual aspects of life.
While not denying the transcendent aspect of spirituality, I’m more concerned with what has developed since the Eleventh Century. That is that we are purposeful life emphasizing the deepest values and meanings by which people live, incorporating personal growth or transformation.
Is it possible that genuine spiritual discovery can get us to where we need to be?
Spirituality plus artificial intelligence image created by Dall-e 2 inspired by thousands of similar images.
I should note that I’m a follower of the Way that Jesus showed us. Over the last few years I’ve been on a quest to better understand spirituality.
Things got very cloudy in the last two-hundred years and we haven’t recovered. In the last century spiritual was considered spooky stuff that might entrap people in false beliefs. The church, with its over 2000 current denominations and its laws, was the standard. Did this not only inhibit spiritual growth, but suppress the concept of spirituality as well?
Wasn’t everything known that needed to be known? That’s a very appropriate question. Over 2000 Christian denominations can’t agree on what is known, for some obscure reason.
Part of the difficulty is that our natural world and our spiritual world are jumbled confusions. I really like science and spirituality, and tolerate some religion as a guide. I'm not anti-religion. We need to clarify what each of these are, understand their limitations and how each functions.
I don’t see these in opposition, nor do I see spirituality in conflict with the church. While many in science are people of faith, many in science want to undermine what is spiritual by calling it superstitious nonsense. I could call some of science superstitious nonsense. But I won’t. I have more respect for science than to do that.
We have to ask the question, “What does science really know?”
The sci-fi novel Observer is by MD and scientist Robert Lanza, a bestselling nonfiction author, and by multiple award-winning sci-fi novelist Nancy Kress. Of course, it’s a worthwhile read.
Scientist Lanza has a theory that “the universe springs from life, not the other way around.” Perhaps he’s correct. He’s considered one of the top 50 world thinkers, and one of the 100 most influential people in the world.
I found the book challenging and thought provoking. I’m a skeptic of both science and religion, especially when they declare absolutes or go off the deep end. I research and write about religion on Patheos for new generations and try to squeeze the objectionable and oppressive nonsense out of it. I do the same for science.
The Observer story pushes science slightly over the top, which is where science fiction is. I didn’t find some statements about the double-slit experiment about “seeing” compelling because I didn’t know where they come from.
Science is fascinating and I try to keep it in perspective. Science doesn’t know what over 90% of the universe is, but Dark matter and dark energy are the current theories that are creating exciting new areas of research. But just like the spiritual, science does not have a way to measure it or directly sense it, even though it can see an influence in nature by the 90% unknown. Yet the spiritual is still considered false.
Math
Math is another conundrum holding a high position in the scientific world. Math is essential to understanding the physical world, but math is not a science.
Math is a construct made by humans for representing things in the world. There might be other representational systems, but we’ve found math sufficient so we don’t look because, you know, we can count on our toes.
Math represents what is known. Math can be an indicator of what is not known but it doesn’t necessarily predict or represent what is unknown. I can write a simple algebraic equation that represents four unknowns in a problem while there are really only three regardless of finding solutions for four variables. Math represents the known. It doesn't determine the unknown.
Another example, in a business equation about profitability (income minus costs) I can write in how many accountants there are at a company as part of the cost. Can I then put the number of accountants on one side of the equation to predict income? Nope.
Accountants don’t belong on that side of the equation. They are a variable that can be affected by many knowns and unknowns, not a constant or an accurate predictor. An accounting firm will have mostly accountants for employees while a very profitable small business might have none.
Another example is quantum physics. Physics and math classical laws didn't work in the quantum world. Things and events in the quantum world had to be represented by new descriptions and formulas in math.
Or in particle physics, certain things were said to be impossible. But scientist Paul Steinhardt discovered Quasicrystals, which was a new class of ordered structures. Paul Steinhardt explains that impossible means: “Contradicts what we would normally expect to be true.”
An example of impossibilities not predicted by math is the transition to superfluids by the very light element helium and the very heavy element mercury. Both will climb the walls of the vessel they are in at near absolute zero temperature. Did math predict that? Or was math later used to represent that characteristic? So using math is tricky.
So when science uses math to predict that there might be an infinite number of universes in the multiverse, or even that there is a multiverse, my skepticism jumps to the foreground with an objection. Why does there have to be multiple universes?
Similarly when science says there is no spiritual world I find those words hollow. Science simply doesn’t have the tools to explore the spiritual world just like it can’t yet sense dark matter and dark energy. Perhaps it lacks a way to represent it.
Then we have to ask ourselves an even deeper question: Do math and physics fully represent our world, just as they don’t represent an as yet to be discovered physical state like superfluids, or does it obscure our thinking about what else might be in the world?
Math represents what we ask it to represent. Since there are things we can’t yet sense, how do we represent them? Just like how does math represent dark matter and dark energy other than just as a constant?
Does science have the tools to explore the spiritual? In my opinion some math works in the spiritual world. It depends on what we label spiritual. This is where confusion comes in. We need to delineate what is the physical world and then the spiritual or other world.
The physical world
Most of us bang our heads against the physical world every day. The physical world is concrete not vapor. We touch it, smell it, see it, and use it. The physical supports life and makes possible our ability to communicate, travel, and do all physical activities.
We’re physical beings bound to a body with physical needs. Our view of the world is very physical.
In describing our physical world science posits that waves are the most fundamental aspects of existence. All matter is formed by waves that become fixed matter through natural processes. The famous double-slit experiment showed that light is a wave that can also be a particle, depending on measurement.
The double-slit experiment (and its variations) is a classic for its clarity in expressing quantum mechanics' central puzzles. Eminent theoretical physicist Richard Feynman called it "a phenomenon which is impossible … to explain in any classical way.
Scientists are divided over aspects of this, sticking to known mathematical representations. The Copenhagen interpretation asserts that it is undesirable to posit anything that goes beyond the mathematical formulae and the kinds of physical apparatus and reactions that enable us to gain some knowledge of what goes on at the atomic scale
The Copenhagen Interpretation is a very modernistic view similar to religion’s view that nothing more can be known or exist outside of organized religion’s views. In the Copenhagen interpretation we have the example of missing what you’re looking for, or not looking for. This is because of insisting current math and physics are the only means of representation and interpretation.
In my science fiction short story, Open versus Closed, I invent another intelligence that doesn’t use math but instead understands relationships between things. In the story I do some comparisons of artificial intelligence, human intelligence, and relationship intelligence. It’s under my name on Smashwords.
Not all cultures even use math so that gives us a window into a world without math.
There are cultures in the Amazon that don’t use numbers. They are limited in their ability to quantify things but they do very well in their environment. In the article ‘Anumeric’ people: What happens when a language has no words for numbers?” the author says that “Human brains come equipped with certain quantitative instincts that are refined with age, but these instincts are very limited.”
We can appreciate that such cultures use words such as “a few” and “most.” What would happen if scientists began creating a different form of relationship besides math.
Does this insistence blind us to other findings that our math can’t reveal because it can’t represent what we don’t already know? Other scientists see all paths and probabilities, such as Relational Interpretation and Many-worlds interpretation.
A key to defining what is spiritual
People who grew up without language because they were deaf and born in undeveloped parts of the world experience an amazing sense of oneness with the world. Similarly people who have had brain damage and lost their ability to use words also experience oneness with the world. Both sets of people, when the ability to use words is obtained, feel that having the ability to use words is a much better state of being.
Going a step beyond this, people who use certain drugs, and those who have Near Death Experiences in which they are physically dead for over six minutes with no brain activity, have similar experiences of oneness, and also often find a renewal of purpose lacking in their lives.
The ability to use words and abstract thought are key to our ability to work with ideas. Without them we’re entirely physical beings at one with the universe.
Unlike in Esotericism, in spirituality nothing is hidden, but developing. I would describe spirituality in this sense as authentic and pragmatic, reflecting reality.
How is this different from the physical world of animals
Most animals can’t use words. Animals can and do communicate even in their natural environment - it's not that they can't. But their capacity to use words is very limited and they apparently have no capacity for abstract thought.
Humans have an enormous vocabulary with which to convey meaning and ideas, and also have the capacity for abstract thought. Humans can create new words that represent new thoughts. Humans can conceive of almost anything and communicate that.
The word is the thing
Words are symbols that represent ideas. We all don’t necessarily have the same understanding of what a word means because just saying the word doesn’t speak something into existence to be grabbed by others or haul around a lot of meaning as it passes through the air.
Words often have multiple definitions. We grasp the word's meaning through knowledge, experience, and context. We often associate an attitude with the word because of positive or negative experiences. Umberto Eco and Eugene Gendlin helped us understand how words work.
Science doesn’t operate directly in this world of words and ideas. Words and ideas are essential to science, but they aren’t physical entities that can be examined directly.
So we have a primary dividing line between the science of the physical world, and the world of ideas that are, for want of a better term, spiritual.
While we connect spirituality in our minds with some esoteric philosophy or transcendent experience, by limiting our understanding to just these ideas we potentially miss what is right in front of us. It's imperative that we pay attention to what is in front of us.
Spirit
Early man felt that spirit was like the wind. Unseen and compelling. The wind moves us. More modern definitions include:
“Those qualities regarded as forming the definitive or typical elements in the character of a person, nation, or group or in the thought and attitudes of a particular period.”
Another definition is: “an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms.”
Another definition in common usage is: “intent.” The spirit of the law is the intent of the law.
So spirituality includes our intent as we are compelled to action by ideas.
Arriving at a description of spirituality: “Spirituality means knowing that our lives have significance in a context beyond a mundane everyday existence at the level of biological needs that drive selfishness and aggression. It means knowing that we are a significant part of a purposeful unfolding of Life in our universe.”
Merriam-Webster definitions of spirit. Cambridge Dictionary definitions of spirit.
Dr. Maya Spencer in the Royal College of Psychiatrists said:
“Spirituality involves the recognition of a feeling or sense or belief that there is something greater than myself, something more to being human than sensory experience, and that the greater whole of which we are part is cosmic or divine in nature.
“Spirituality means knowing that our lives have significance in a context beyond a mundane everyday existence at the level of biological needs that drive selfishness and aggression.
“It means knowing that we are a significant part of a purposeful unfolding of Life in our universe. Spirituality involves exploring certain universal themes – love, compassion, altruism, life after death, wisdom and truth ….”
“In modern times the emphasis is on subjective experience and the "deepest values and meanings by which people live", incorporating personal growth or transformation, usually in a context separate from organized religious institutions. Spirituality can be defined generally as an individual's search for ultimate or sacred meaning, and purpose in life.” – Wikipedia
The preceding definitions are not about a dead thing like simple knowledge. They are about being alive and compelled to action.
Religion and the spiritual
Religion recognizes the Spirit of God's activity in our lives. But it’s self-serving, generally only allowing only what it already believes. But I believe religion should be helpful in spiritual growth even if that means some cherished teachings are subverted (or enhanced), and the organization is contradicted. Rigidness has no place in the ever-changing world of God.
Without religion, spirituality has no guide. Thousands of years and thousands of voices provide roots for grounding and centering. Most of us want a context to work within.
Is life meaningless?
In existential philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre’s novel, Nausea, the main character realizes that nothing exists for any real reason so he is overcome with nausea. Sartre arrived at existentialism like many who were horrified by never-ending war and overcome by centuries of conflict. (Thanks to Beyond Belief for the Sartre reference.)
On the other hand, psychiatrist Viktor Frankl searched deeply for meaning while interned in a Nazi concentration camp. He was completely stripped of everything meaningful to him.
Frankl's experience compelled him to created Logotherapy to help others find meaning, and taught that there are three avenues by which people can find meaning in life. In Postmodernism and after there is the idea of creating meaning. Many follow this idea.
Is life meaningless, as Sartre suggests? Is life just a sea of total relativism temporarily formed out of chaos? Can we find meaning by looking very deeply as Frankl suggests? I believe we are grounded in love and that's the basis for finding meaning in our lives.
What does this all mean to you?
I like to ask the question, “What does this mean to me?” Otherwise the words are just blather. My view differs from that of science, classical religion, and existential philosophy.
I’m not a scientist. Scientists talk about possibility spaces and probabilities and try to devise a mathematical model. That’s the quantum world where gravitational fields and roiling quantum foam play, and where the physics we use in everyday life has little meaning. It’s where the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and entropy (disintegration) thrive in chaos.
I talk about potential spaces. In physical terms it’s the space where the expanding universe reaches and creates a space where one didn’t exist. In spiritual terms it’s the space where our minds play as we wrestle with the human condition and come to new realizations. It’s the playing field of creativity where we create to understand and control ourselves, creating guides and tools for living.
In the world of the living and the spirit, life builds, and entropy leading to disintegration is defeated or postponed. Perhaps the uncertainty principle is also defeated.
My crystal ball broke and I’m not a prophet or a psychic. But I look deeply into things and that’s where things are sparked by our creativity into new things when the moment is pregnant with possibility and the time has come for something to arrive.
Like symbols to which we assign meaning, the potential spaces have no inherent meaning, but contains what we assign to it.
So come with me on this journey to understand better the spiritual world where neither math nor fixed religious belief keeps us in chains.