Transforming the Inconsequential into the Profound

Dr. John Vervaeke and Gregg Henriques continue their thought-provoking exploration of Transcendent Naturalism by examining extended naturalism, neoplatonism, and the dimensions of sacredness. They challenge conventional notions of sacredness by examining its connection with strong transcendence and discussing Spinoza's insights into nature, God's ultimate reality, and the universe's deterministic nature, aligning with the Neoplatonic framework. They discuss religious perspectives, comparing classical and common theism and their evolution, while addressing the interplay between energy, consciousness, and reality, highlighting the philosophical underpinnings of theism. They also intriguingly differentiate spirituality from religion, both rooted in the concept of the sacred, and discuss symbolic ideals, spiritual richness, consequential history, and the profound significance of consequential decisions in our lives.

Resources:

• The Case for God - Karen Armstrong

• Religion and Nothingness - Keiji Nishitani

• Thinking Being: Introduction to Metaphysics in the Classical Tradition - Eric Pearl

• Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge - Edward Osborne Wilson

Time-codes:

[00:00:00] Dr. John Vervaeke outlines the episode's structure: extended naturalism, the meaning of sacredness within extended naturalism, the concept of strong transcendence, and three phenomena where people traditionally express a sense of transcendence: rituals, altered states of consciousness, and belonging to a worldview.

[00:04:53] Dr. Vervaeke dives into the first topic, extended naturalism. He discusses the consilience between structural and content arguments in the context of neoplatonism.

[00:07:36] Discussion of Spinoza's distinction between nature nurturing and nature being nurtured, a concept that explores the relationship between top-down and bottom-up processes in nature, bringing  forward the idea of God not as a physical entity but as the source of all existence and understanding. [00:15:14] Dr. John Vervaeke discusses the features of common theism and its basis in classical theology, shares his perspective on the debates between theists and atheists, and the conception of God as a supreme being 

[00:18:00] The concept of God as the ground that supports continual self-transcendence, and a contemplative discussion on theism's classical and common forms, pushing the boundaries of philosophical exploration.

[00:25:19] A deep dive into how truth can exist outside our understanding, challenging conventional beliefs.

[00:30:20] Dr. Vervaeke delves into the concept of sacredness, describing it as an inexhaustible and paradoxical fountain of intelligibility. He also highlights the limitations of traditional propositional knowing in fully comprehending this concept.

[00:37:23] The concepts of soul and spirit as ineffable aspects of human experience, with the soul, referring to the groundedness of our experiences and spirit pointing to our capacity for self-transcendence, and discussion on the connection between the symbolic ideal and the transcendent,

[00:38:09] Symbolic Ideals & Transcendence: Gregg Henriques links symbolic ideals to deeper philosophical perspectives, enriching discourse.

[00:41:20] Dr. John Vervaeke explains the concept of sacredness as a transjective experience, providing a new perspective on the understanding of sacredness.

[00:44:53] Gregg Henriques introduces a proposes a new concept of inconsequential versus consequential history; viewing historical events based on their long-term impact.

[00:55:00] Dr. John Vervaeke outlines his plan to explore the deep interconnections between an extended notion of rationality and ritual and their power, including an explanation of how and why we experience strong transcendence within ritual experiences, within the framework of extended naturalism.

Qoutes:

“Strong transcendence has epistemological and ontological import. The idea is that there are truths about reality that are disclosed only when one goes through a transcendence, which also gives you access to different levels of knowing.” - Dr. John Vervaeke

“Generalizability in and of itself it's not really intelligibility. It’s generalizability in relationship to the capacity for differentiation held in appropriate dialectic. There's a generalizable differentiation polarity where the poles between the two is going to afford intelligibility, and it's the right relationship of that t that is fundamentally key.” - Gregg Henriques