Quote:
Originally Posted by nutronjon  Quote: |
"Pantheism is the view that everything is of an all-encompassing immanent abstract God; or that the Universe, or nature, and God are equivalent. " Pantheism is a venerable and historied idea that one’s unwise, I think, to dismiss as simply “false”.
| I am not sure what you have said. Have you said pantheism might have merit? |
Certainly I assert that
pantheism - and even many other views and belief systems less compatible with science – have merit. Even religious interpretations of the world now viewed by a majority of a given community as reprehensible - for example, Mormonism, which professes scientifically unsupported racists policies (eg, see
Mormon racism in perspective) - can be shown to have merit, in that the contribution of individuals and communities to society can be show to be improved by them.
Specifically, pantheism is a view very compatible with a rational, scientifically materialistic worldview, as evidenced by the prominent scientists such as Einstein that have openly subscribed to pantheism.
It’s very important, however, to precisely defined the view I’ll here term “pure pantheism” (which previously and hereafter I’ll refer to by the single term “pantheism”), and distinguish it from related views, such as
panentheism. As I interpret it, pantheism arises from the recognition that our minds – the entirely physical properties and processes that result in us thinking and communicating our thoughts with one another – work best when we maintain a degree of emotional arousal correlated to certain subjects, such as scientific theories describing fundamental physical interactions and their large-scale statistical properties. We are, IMHO, neurologically constituted in a way that lends itself to beneficial emotions such as sense of awe and humility in the face of nature, emotions traditionally considered within the domain of religion and mysticism. Pantheism provides a worldview that allows us to experience this – to feel a motivating and rewarding sense of emotional ecstasy around often rigorous and bewildering concepts – without the requirement to accept on faith any proposition unsupportable by scientifically materialistic means.
In contrast, panentheism is the belief that “the substance of God” permeates physical reality, causing it to interact as it is observed to. It is entirely as superstitious as the belief that the world as assembled from formless matter and life and order “breathed into” it by a supreme creator or inferior
demiurge. Although panentheism is not, IMHO, inherently incompatible with a scientific worldview, every scientific hypothesis based upon it has, to the best of my knowledge, either not yet been tested, or been demonstrated false. Well known recent panentheistic theories include Rupert Sheldrake’s
morphic field, a radical alternative to practically all theories of physics. Regrettably, rather than admitting the failure of the theoretical predictions of this and other theories to be experimentally confirmed, many proponents falsely claim that they have been. When this occurs, such theories cease to be scientific, and become what is commonly termed
pseudoscience.
IMHO, pantheism is a very useful component of a scientifically-minded person’s personal belief system, while panentheism is not. Understanding the precise definitions and distinctions between these two concepts is of less but similar importance than understanding, say, the precise definitions and distinctions of the scientific concepts of
force and
energy.
I’m concerned, neutronjon, that you may not adequately understand the definitions and either of the above two pairs of concepts. I suspect you either already do or could quickly understand pantheism, panentheism, and related terms, but would need to put greater effort into understanding basic physics. Despite the effort involved, I believe such an undertaking would be of great benefit to you personally, and to your contributions to hypography.
__________________
Moderator: Computers and Technology; Medical Science; Science Projects and Homework; Philosophy of Science; Physics and Mathematics; Environmental Studies
"Pure pantheism" is not panentheism 
Emblematic statements 
