A Cosmology of Mononaturalism

work in progress

A Cosmology of Mononaturalism¹

Mono-naturalism is a belief that there can be only one all-inclusive ultimate nature or reality, which may contain divine beings (God, gods, demigods, saints…) but it is not a divine being itself.  This means that the mono-nature is beyond being a god, in this sense it is a Transtheism.

My personal position on Mono-naturalism is as follows; a simultaneous relativistic neutral freely existing perpetually changing natural monism:

It is a simultaneous monism nether the whole or parts have absolute priority over each other.  It is relativistic in that all things within it are relative to reach other and the whole.  It is neutral in that it has an absolutely simple single neutral fundamental relative substance, which is not completely given to being any one type of substance.  It freely exists in that it ‘just is’ without depending on something to cause it, it did not cause itself or was it caused by something other than itself.  It is perpetually changing in that change is the fundamental process of its existence, by changing into something similar itself.  It is a natural monism in that it is the only all-inclusive ultimate reality, which may contain divine beings.

Descriptive look at my Mono-naturalism, It is a simultaneous monism by holding the position that nether the whole or parts has absolute priority over each other; each is the source of the other.  This means that no whole (cosmos) exist completely absent of part(s) and no part(s) exist completely separate from a whole, the whole and the parts are impossible without each other.  Or stated simply, no cosmos can exist without parts and no cosmic parts can exist completely separate from the cosmos, both depend on each other for their existence simultaneously. If one accepts the big bang theory, the universe starts as an infinitely small singularity that expands into a universe with its own proper parts.  Simultaneous monism assumes that the parts and the whole are simultaneous reciprocal components of a single reality (monism); this view does not contradict the big bang theory. If on the other hand one accepts creation out of nothing theory, whether by divine being or as an occurrence of nature, the nothing is a simple or single reality where the whole and the part are simultaneously the same reality and equally what is created out of nothing is something that can have parts and a whole simultaneously as derived from its source, nothingness.  Simultaneous monism does not contradict the creation from nothing theory.

  It is relativistic in that all things within it are relative to reach other and the whole.  It is neutral in that it has an absolutely simple single neutral fundamental relative substance, which is not completely given to being any one type of substance.  It freely exists in that it ‘just is’ without depending on something to cause it, it did not cause itself or was it caused by something other than itself.  It is perpetually changing in that change is the fundamental process of its existence, by changing into something similar itself.  It is a natural monism in that it is the only all-inclusive ultimate reality, which may contain divine beings.

It has four categories of reality.  Fundamental reality is whatever the source reality is; in this case the monism itself as the genesis of all other realities.  Direct reality is whatever an actuality is, which in this case is anything in the temporal present.  Indirect reality is whatever is possible, which in this case is anything in the temporal past or future.  Abdirect reality is whatever a governing principle is, which in this case is anything’s propensity and or destiny.

Notes:

1.       Mononaturalism is a word that seems to fit the combined thoughts of Anaximander of Miletus, C. S.  Peirce and Albert Einstein.  

Fallacy of Misplaced Deity

Work in progress. 

Does god exist? Yes, no or other. Or does ___ exist? Yes, no or other. We should have an idea of what god is before can answer the question. 

Defining God with a definition that all can agree to is the first problem. I will use this definition; God or god(s) is whatever you think God or god(s) is with the same basic certainty of reality as other things in a category you have placed God or god(s) in, existence, non-existence or other.  Hopefully you agree with whatever you think God or god(s) is but now you must provide the same basic certainty of reality as other things in a category you have identified God or god(s) with, that is existence, non-existence or other. Until you provide that same basic certainty of reality as other things in a category you will be committing a categorical fallacy, no matter what you think God or god(s) is by faith or otherwise. 

Fallacy of Misplaced Deity:

The Fallacy of Misplaced Deity is the error of applying an improper category of reality to Deity, Examples: Theists want to place God or god(s) in the categorical reality of things that are existent and Atheists want to place God or god(s) in the categorical reality of things that are non-existent or still others who would place God or god(s) in the categorical reality of things that are impossible. It is not possible to place God or god(s) in these categories with the same basic certainty of the things already in those categories; ergo to place God or god(s) in the categorical reality of the existent or non-existent or impossible things is the Fallacy of Misplaced Deity. However it would not be a fallacy to place God or god(s) in the categorical reality of things that are possible or in the categorical reality of things that are an alternate reality, because it can be done with the same basic certainty as the things already in those categories.

Committing the Fallacy of Misplaced Deity:

     1.       God exist, no God exist or God is impossibility:

a.       God has not been defined as an exist thing, on the same basic level of certainty as other things in the category of existent things. For example; plans, trains, automobiles, living being, thoughts, emotions and the earth are defined as existent things but God has no definition in the same way as these things. That is there is no definition of God that is supported by an identifiable thing that indicates that it’s an existent God. Because what God is, is not definable in this way, it is then the Fallacy of Misplaced Deity to define God or god(s) as an existing thing.

b.      God has not been defined as a non-exist thing, on the same basic level of certainty as other things in the category of non-existent things. For example; fictional thing and beings, destroyed things and dead beings are non-existent things but God has no definition in the same way as these non-existent things. That is there is no definition of God that is supported by an identifiable non-existent thing which indicates that it’s a non-existent God. Because what God is, is not definable in this way, it is then the Fallacy of Misplaced Deity to define God or god(s) as a non-existing thing.

c.       God has not been defined as an impossible thing, on the same basic level of certainty as other things in the category of impossible things. For example; things or beings that have contradictory definition; squire circle, rectangle oval, no-house house, something being what it is not, but God has no definition in the same way as these impossible things. That is there is no definition of God that is supported by an identifiable impossible thing that indicates that it’s an impossible God. Because what God is, is not definable in this way, it is then the Fallacy of Misplaced Deity to define God or god(s) as an impossible thing.

d.      To define and say that God exist, no God exist or God is an impossibility has fallen short of meeting the same basic level of certainty as other things in the categories of existent, non-existent and impossible thing in three ways; 1. God or god(s) have not been identified as something in our reality that corresponds to a definition in any of the three categories, 2. God or god(s) have not been identified as something that is consistent with the reality of other things defined in the three categories and  3. God or god(s) have not been identified as something that can be satisfactorily defined within any of the three categories.

Not committing the Fallacy of Misplaced Deity:

  2. God is a possibility or God and alternate reality:

a.       God can be defined as a possible thing, on the same basic level of certainty as other things in the category of possible things. For example; possible; plans, trains, automobiles, living beings or other realities are in the category of possible by default just as God or gods can be possible by default, , until they are found to be identifiable in some other category.

 d.      As a sub-category of possibility, God may be partially defined as an alternate reality, on the same basic level of certainty as other things in the category of alternate reality. Alternate reality in the sense that it nether exists nor is non-existent but is a type of reality none the less. Examples; Laws that express the way Reality works, universal qualities as permanent possibilities for things in our reality such as coldness, hotness or redness (as determined my the nature of Reality)and godliness as a possible.