Linearity and the Materialist Worldview

One of the challenges that we believers face today is how to respond to a scientific worldview that posits that God does not exist.  This worldview is pervasive; we find it everywhere we turn.  The computer on which you are likely reading this newsletter is one of thousands of examples of the technology that has come from this worldview.  Yet, this perspective denies the existence of God and denies anything that might be considered ‘spiritual.’  Prominent intellectuals have written best-selling books on the ‘foolishness’ of believing in God.  How are we, who are believers, to respond to these challenges?

From my perspective, it seems best to meet these challenges head-on and examine the commonly held components that underpin our prevailing scientific worldview.  To this end, I would like to explore some concepts that are likely unfamiliar to most of my readers.  While the read below may be a bit difficult to follow, I think you will find it helpful as you deepen your spiritual journey.

Linearity.

Earlier this week, I got to thinking about the difference between linearity and non-linearity.  From our human perspective, most of the world appears to be linear; that is, one discrete object or experience is followed by the next, and then the next, in a linear fashion.  Briefly, linearity is characterized by observable data from which we can abstract verifiable rules that guide behavior.

In this linear world, we are able to identify causation because we repeatedly observe one thing causing something else to happen.  We have seen this from our infancy, over and over again, and there is very little that could make us believe in something else.  There are so many examples of linearity in our daily lives.  We use numbers in a linear fashion:  1… 2… 3… and so on.  We believe that if you take one atom of oxygen and two of hydrogen, place them in the presence of a catalyst, they will form a molecule of water.  The examples seem endless.

Sir Isaac Newton developed the mathematics to describe our everyday experiences, and since then, we have trusted our scientists and mathematicians to describe and clarify the reality we see around us.  On balance, they have done a splendid job.  To verify this, all you need to do is look around you.  The car you drive, the dwelling you live in, your everyday experiences at work – they all support this linear perspective.

Linearity, for the most part, describes the world as we experience it.  However, when you look more closely, you begin to find an increasing number of things that cannot be described from this perspective.  When you leave the realm of our daily experiences and look at the macro-world, the cosmos, you find that linearity no longer works very well.  In parallel, when you look at the micro-world, at the level of subatomic particles and beyond, you find that they cannot be described with our linear perspective.  We have left the realm of our ‘normal’ and entered into a realm that appears fantastic, where all sorts of strange phenomena occur.

If you will, we appear to live in a three–part world.  At the cosmic level – including stars, galaxies, and so on – the perspective is nonlinear.  At the human level – our sensory experience of the day-to-day world around us – the rules of linearity appear to govern our experience.  At the micro level – the world of subatomic particles and beyond – the perspective again becomes nonlinear.  The subatomic particles just do not behave like we expect, given our linear frame of reference.  

These data suggest that our linear perspective may be incorrect.  Does it really make sense to have a three-part world like this?  Doesn’t it seem more likely that the apparent linearity of our everyday world is actually nonlinear?

Scientific Materialism.

Our prevailing scientific paradigm has been one of scientific materialism.  This philosophy states that only matter and energy exist.  In this view, every phenomenon we experience is caused by matter and energy interacting in its several forms.  This perspective has been highly effective as a means for transforming our world.  Most of our technological progress has been driven by this paradigm.  The combination of linear thinking in the context of this materialist worldview has been responsible for pulling humanity from subsistence living to the relative luxury we enjoy today.

There are, however, phenomena that materialism cannot explain.  Scientific materialism postulates a Big Bang that started our cosmos, but it cannot explain what existed before the Big Bang or why the Big Bang occurred in the first place.  It cannot explain how the spectrum of vibrant life arose from nonliving elements.  It cannot explain what is called ‘the hard problem of consciousness,’ which is how our consciousness came into being from nonliving elements.

As you might suspect, scientific materialism is adamantly opposed to the notion of God or anything that might be termed ‘spiritual.’  Thus, there are serious limits to the explanatory power of this philosophy.  To date, it has been unable to explain many of our most important human experiences.  Experiences like our conscious awareness.  Experiences like love – that strange invisible force which binds us together and which allows us to endure unimaginable suffering, and can lift us to astounding heights.

Over the last 50 years, a large array of data has been collected which are inexplicable from the perspective of scientific materialism.  With the advances in medical science – advances which were created out of the materialistic perspective – we now have records of thousands of ‘near-death experiences.’  These are experiences of individuals who have died on the operating table, remained lifeless for a period of time, and then been restored to life.  Many individuals who have experienced this have reported that their conscious awareness left their body and observed what was happening while they were clinically dead.  These experiences indicate that the physical body is not necessary for conscious awareness.  How else can you explain a verifiably dead body and a person’s consciousness existing apart from that body?

Near-death experiences are not the only phenomena that give lie to the philosophy of materialism.  How do you explain the spiritual experiences of the great mystics?  They regularly describe seeing God, angels, and other spiritual beings.  So-called ‘miracles’ seem to occur in their presence with some regularity.  Because these phenomena cannot be ascribed to material causes, scientific materialists deny their existence.  To my mind, it would seem more reasonable to question the validity of the materialist perspective.  To simply deny the impact of the Divine seems like cheating.  Instead of taking these phenomena seriously, the way scientists take every other experience, they simply deny that these phenomena exist.  In my view, this is sloppy thinking.

God and the Nonlinear.

The Divine, to our continued consternation, doesn’t seem bound by linearity.  The Burning Bush that Moses experienced will never be understood by observable rules.  The person of Jesus Christ, likewise, cannot be understood by observable rules.  How do you account for all of his miracles?  His coming to life again after being crucified?  How can it be that an ignorant peasant from a conquered Roman province, some 2,000 years ago, is the most famous person in the world today?  None of this makes sense from a linear perspective.  Yet, the facts are there, and they are incontrovertible.  

Of interest, we tend to expect God to act in a linear fashion.  For example, many believers pray for healing, either for themselves or for others.  In general, those who pray for healing seem to want God to respond in a very specific and linear way.  Their prayers go something like this: “Please, Lord, heal Aunt Mary of her cancer and restore her to health.”  In effect, they are asking God to respond in a linear fashion with a specific healing for a specific person, often within a specific timeframe.  Of note, these prayers are rarely answered in this manner.

As a believer, this constantly challenges our beliefs.  Why would the Divine not respond according to our petitions in the way we ask?  Perhaps it’s not a matter of a nonresponsive God.  Perhaps, instead, we are expecting a linear response – 1 leads to 2, which leads to 3, and so on – from a nonlinear Being.

And this brings us to yet another question.  How can we – creatures living in a linear framework – come to know the Divine?  It seems clear that approaching God with our linear expectations is likely to be problematic.  How can we move beyond these apparent limitations?  This, I think, is best left for another day and another newsletter.

~

Before we finish for the day, let’s look at the data we have compiled to see what conclusions we might draw:

1.  While scientific materialism has contributed greatly to our material well-being, it does not answer many of our deepest and most serious questions.

2.  While scientific materialism masquerades as objective truth, it is not.  It is simply one philosophy among many. That being said, in a conversation with a friend of mine, a quantum chemist, he stated that “scientific materialism actually does a pretty good job of (discerning) objective truth within the bounds of the scientific method, which requires that physical explanations of phenomena must be supportable by reproducible observations.”

3.  Many of the proponents of this materialist philosophy appear to be intellectually dishonest.  Rather than face the serious questions raised by their philosophy, they dismiss them out of hand.  These are questions like the hard problem of consciousness, what came before the Big Bang, and what precipitated the Big Bang, and many others.

~

Well, I think that this is enough for this week.  If you brain doesn’t feel all twisted around and upside down – well, I guess it means that I haven’t done my job well enough. LOL!  On a more serious note, I hope I have helped you sort through some of the conflicting information that we get on a daily basis about what is real and what is not.  The bottom line – we are all trying to get to the truth.  I believe that our ultimate truth will take us into a remarkable realization – that the Divine is within us and has never, ever been apart from us.  

In the certainty that we are firmly held in God’s love,

P.S.  These newsletters were written in a particular order, but due to the limitations of our email delivery system, we cannot send them in the order in which they were written.

We can send out the first five in order, but then the system sends out the next one, whatever that happens to be.  So, if you are suddenly moving from issue #5 to issue #whatever, it might be a little jarring.  If this sounds like you, I would encourage you to go back into our archives and do your best to read them in order.

P.P.S.  Several of you have expressed the desire for an online meditation class.  If there is enough interest, I will try to figure out how to hold a group class on the web.  If you have an interest, please write me at [email protected]. 

Humility as a Tool  → Letting go → Fear → Openness →  Acceptance & Growth

If you are finding this newsletter course helpful, you may want to consider Dr. Kaisch's latest book, Inside the Invisible:  The Universal Path to Spiritual Transcendence.👇

To access the other newsletter editions of the “Inside The Invisible Newsletter,” or if you’d like to read ahead or go back.

Please Note: These newsletters are meant to be read in order.