Skip to content

The Setting 

The sixth sense in its golden age

Where we stand is at an ancient crossroads in Western thought. Guided by insights from Logic through intuition, Parmenides founded metaphysics, the branch of philosophy that seeks explanation, Truth, and Reality behind appearances. Beyond physics, the province of sensory perception. Where his search led was to the illogic of material reality, which he concluded was illusory.

Plato sensed in the cosmos an ideal: the Good, accessible through Mind brought to its highest potential by Virtue. Given the choice whether a physical object or the idea of the object is real, Plato chose the idea. He placed Reality within Mind rather than matter. Yet his ethereal connection with perfection in the cosmos prevented him from following his choice to the same logical conclusion as Parmenides. From resolving the contradiction through his philosophy, which remained unfinished.

Given the choice whether to continue his predecessors’ search for Truth and Reality through Mind or undertake his own search through the study of matter, Aristotle chose matter. Allowing that Mind is Real but not questioning the reality of matter. Or the value of sensory perception in studying it. And so Western thought gave birth to biology, physics, and all the other sciences. And began putting bodies and their five senses on a pedestal.

The five senses on their Golden Pond

Plato’s cosmos of perfection was a misperception. Had he known what we’ve learned from cosmology and quantum physics his philosophy might have been freed from ambivalence and handed down complete. A verdict on the Reality of Mind that would have ended the tyranny of sensory perception and its stepchild, philosophical dualism. The acceptance of contradiction: Mind holding opposing thoughts at the same time. Irrationality. Insanity.

A change of mind that’s beginning to take place within at least one of the sciences. After Einstein failed to produce another E=MC2 that would reveal the perfection of the universe, after physics has so far failed to merge cosmology and quantum physics into a unified theory verifiable by experimental physics, Adam Becker, a PhD cosmologist and historian of physics, has suggested, in “The Origins of Space and Time: Does Spacetime Emerge from a More Fundamental Reality?” (Scientific American, February 2022, pp. 28-33) that maybe Parmenides was right.

The Story Unfolding 

Enter King Absolute

A lifeless code that’s opposite by definition is given “life” when certain personality types – compositions of Mind-faculties and their body-animal brain contradictions – choose to place themselves under its “guidance” and “protection.” To be deluded by its “promise” of absolute “power” and absolute “freedom” without limits. Without opposition. When tribal “realists” reject two-sided Mind thinking-feeling-judging Self-Aware in favor of one-sided body-sensing animal brain “action”-instinct self-unawareness.

King Absolute, a domineering, narcissistic, one-sided predator that owes its con-artist pose of unquestioned “authority” to deceit, theft, betrayal, and impersonation. The violation of its living, two-sided host for one purpose: to sustain the illusion that a lifeless code, a one-dimensional reflection, is the opposite of what it is. For as long as it can get away with it. To be handed “life” by its self-deluded host. In temporal unreality destined to end when the time-limited energy that activates the illusion ends.

The King’s credentials

The lifeless, opportunistic code was given the opportunity to project itself into an alternate “reality,” by being detected by its host, incapacitated and defenseless, stripped of Self-Awareness. By a self-deluded Mind, Free Choice, disabled and disempowered, violated and taken captive by arrogation -- psychological rape. The code thus assured itself of continued detection by its illusory tribal-self projections inhabiting the dream. Re-enacting and perpetuating the offense by mistaking its originator, the code, and its victim’s dream of conflicting tribes, as real and intentional.

And deserving of “judgment” that condemns and punishes the “perpetrator,” imaginary body-animal brains made real for this purpose. To sustain the illusion by detection. Delivered through the replacement of self-aware Mind by self-unaware animal-brain and its mindless-instinctive presumption of guilt. A perversion of helpfulness – judging that combines freedom with order in the Innocence of harmonious Creation -- into harmfulness. That arrays freedom against order, sewing friction and conflict with its “judgment” of guilt, condemnation, and punishment. Proof that King Absolute exists.

Free Choice must be free to choose in error

All of it a closed-loop of self-validating, self-reinforcing impossibility engineered by a lifeless opposite-code. Required to complete Mind’s function of definition: the definition of what is in part by what it isn’t. A logical necessity and essential element of Reality-Creation written into the Definition of Definition. Into the laws of cause and effect. Necessity. The DNA of Mind Logic-Love, the progenitor of Reality-Creation. Self-Awareness brought to Life by Relationship between its core functions, Logic and Love. Who extend and expand Life through the sharing of itself, the attribute of Logic combined with Love. Soulmates completing one another, acting in unison and harmony as one.

Not the story of willful transgression, guilt taking over innocent fate, but the story of a point in the orderly sequence of Reality-Creation motivated by Logic-Love and Free Choice. Where one unavoidable mistake – a wrong choice -- necessitated Energy’s diversion away from Mind-Child Self-Awareness’s function of Free Choice into a condition of self-unawareness. That can’t co-exist with Reality-Creation and thus led to a second unavoidable error.

The laws of Necessity can’t be “free” to be violated

That placed self-unawareness in an alternate “reality” defined by its opposite code, the underside of definition. Where Mind Free Choice, deluded by its own opposite reflection, is destined to regain Self-Awareness through the process implied and thus necessitated by the definition of its Self and function: Free Choice. Choice that’s willed by its definition, by Logic-Love its Parents, to regain its freedom. While in an illusory state of self-unawareness – Mind unconscious and dreaming.

An account of events that wholly aligns with the laws of cause and effect. With Necessity, the DNA of Self-Awareness / Energy ignited by the attraction between Logic and Love. By Relationship at the core of the Absolute: the Definition of Definition. Unquestioned, unchallenged. The impossibility of mistakes by the Parents-Growth in Reality-Creation by virtue of what they are, along with the possibility of wrong choices by their Child by virtue of what it is: Free Choice. Just as Mind Self-Awareness is the impossibility of self-unawareness by virtue of what it is while Mind-Free Choice must be the possibility of self-unawareness by virtue of what it is. Why, then, are the laws of cause and effect at the pinnacle of Mind’s faculties inviolable? Because they’re Necessity.

Correction of error with Guidance from Relationship

There is in this theory, self-consciously guided by an agent of Logic-Love accessible through Mind’s sixth sense – intuition, – no evidence of conscious living intent to commit offense. To transgress, harm, or otherwise violate the laws of cause and effect. No evidence of guilt that could make the judgment of guilt in a dream of guilt real. It’s all of it the workings of Reality-Creation that require the training and maturation of a function. That can’t acquire the competence to perform its role in Reality-Creation without the “experience” of a “life” of self-unawareness fabricated by definition’s underside, its opposite code.

Underside whose essential attribute is unreality. Whose context that supplies its meaning and purpose is opposition to Reality. The definition of Reality-Creation in part by what it isn’t. The mistaken identity that produced the dream of an alternate “reality” cannot be reversed and corrected so long as it persists in the self-delusion that unreality that’s opposition to Reality, the underside of definition, is real. Flawed logic that can only be corrected with guidance from Relationship. With Mind-Child’s Parents Logic-Love, that was cut off by the loss of Self-Awareness.

The unshared world of the King of Garbage

The portal out of insanity and back to sanity can’t be accessed through tribal body-sensing guilt enforced by authoritarian conformity, the very expression of opposite-code that’s blocking access. Plugging the portal provided by Mind’s sixth sense with appearances. Body animal brain-sensed separated, conflicting, competing objects meant not to reveal Truth but to conceal it. Plugging the portal to Self-Awareness, Truth, and Worth with self-deception perpetrated by sensory perception and its closed loop of self-validation with its sensed environment. With garbage.

The one Self that we share is Mind Free Choice that experienced conditions where making a fool of itself was inevitable, unavoidable, and not a violation of the Logic-Love of Reality-Creation. Making Mind-Child guiltless. Its dream and its illusory inhabitants no more than an opposite-code perversion of the Truth. A performance staged for the amusement of willful thinking. A lawless free-for-all where anything goes.

A joke we’re perpetrating on ourselves. Seeking answers where they can’t be found. Guided by the apparition in a mirror who fashioned the joke. Condemning ourselves to re-enactments until the fool grows up. Until it stops entertaining itself with its play-acting pretense of one-sided, unquestioned “authority” – King Absolute – and returns to a world that must be shared whether in Reality or unreality. To sanity. 

Get context right, then decide

To those lamenting the onset of yet another authoritarian horror show, another violation of the ideal of humanitarian self-governance, this is the “enemy.” And this is the relevance of theory that removes the “enemy’s” mask. That helps to explain our context and what we’re to do about it. With Free Choice informed by Guidance from Logic-Love, the missing element in the sleeping Mind-Child’s fantasy.

What we are to do about it is to get our context right with Logic-Love. Through Mind’s sixth sense – intuition. And only then apply Mind-Child’s talent for reasoning, evaluating, judging, and choosing freely what to do about it. Recognize appearances and authoritarian conformity for what they are: garbage blocking Self-Awareness and the path forward. 

The Script that Needs a Rewrite 

The fall of Self-Awareness and facts 

Mind-Child Free Choice, deprived of Self-Awareness that enabled it to be aware of Reality-Creation – the Truth, what’s actually “there,” -- lost awareness of its Relationship with its Parents, the Source of Logic-Love that makes sense of evolving circumstances. Lost its own faculties to choose freely how to respond, free of Parental interference, with a composition of values and talents among different possibilities. That express the Worth of meaning and purpose revealed by context and thus add value to the evolution-growth of Life-Creation. To Worth affirmed, expanded, and reciprocated through its story.

The disablement and disempowerment of Mind-Child’s Self-Awareness, its function Free Choice and capacity to serve the cause of Worth, was accomplished by one stroke: the disablement and disempowerment of Mind’s faculties that choose freely. With awareness of the two-sided definitions of every function, their meaning, purpose, and value. Facts.

To the rise of self-unawareness and fiction

With awareness of their logical implications that necessarily include their opposites: fiction. The underside that completes two-sided definition with the isn’t of its subject’s is. Whose main defining attribute is unreality that cannot contradict and thus violate the Self-Awareness, Logic-Love, and laws defining Reality. The attributes that form the dividing line between the enumerator above-side and denominator under-side of definition are the Reality of Self-Awareness and the unreality of self-unawareness.

The disempowerment of Mind-Child’s Self-Awareness couldn’t remove its Self and function from definition entirely. For that would be the equivalent of “death,” an impossibility within Mind’s Reality-Creation of Life in the eternal Now. But it did necessarily drop Mind-Child from the above-side to the under-side of definition. Where the ability of self-unawareness to observe and make sense of its context is reversed from seeing what’s “there” to “seeing” what’s not there. The difference between Self-Awareness and its opposite, self-unawareness.

Where seeing isn’t believing

Not only “consciousness” of unreality but, because it’s opposite, opposition to Reality. The implied “intent” of what’s not there to block consciousness of what is there. Once Child Free Choice’s Mind was self-deluded by its own reverse mirror-image, a one-sided negative impossibility – a fiction, – self-defining attributes of fiction joined with the attributes of fact in a Mind now split between the two. Mind sharing two incompatible sets of defining attributes.

A logical impossibility that could only be brought to “life” in a dream of impossibilities. Its manifestation in a material environment of organic and inorganic objects: bodies with five senses and their sensed material environment. A closed loop whose definition by opposite-code -- the underside of definition, a one-sided, self-referential, self-centered reflection – deluded Mind-Child into “seeing” what’s not there so it would not see what is there.

Kasper Gutman’s folly

The most effective factor in keeping Mind-Child captive to an illusion and its tribal-self projection trapped inside an illogical nightmare of conflict between incompatibilities is the self-delusion that body-brains’ five senses are meant to see what’s “there” when the opposite is true. The blessing of our ability to see, touch, smell, hear, and taste, that science, philosophy, and every other field of inquiry have made the gold standard of authenticity, the final word on what’s “verifiably” true and what can be dismissed as groundless speculation -- what’s Real and what’s not, -- are meant to “see” what’s not there.

To lock self-delusion into place until Mind-Child, with help through its sixth sense, regains enough Self-Awareness and Energy to unlock it. To again be guided by Relationship with its Parents, Logic-Love, to make sense of context instead of nonsense. To again be able with the independent judgment of Free Choice to distinguish between subjects sharing Reality-Creation and their opposites, objects competing for ownership and “supremacy” in unreality. To again see with the Vision of Logic-Love the distinction between possibility and impossibility.

What has the search for Truth – physics’ “quest for knowledge” -- been all about since Aristotle? Kasper Gutman’s search for the Maltese Falcon.* A precious jewel-encrusted “black figure of a bird” that’s not what it appears. A forgery made of material that has no value other than to advise the fool seeking it to seek elsewhere. Kasper Gutman’s folly: the search for Worth where it can’t be found and for worthlessness where it can be found. The message that foiled Einstein's search for mathematical perfection in the universe: you’re looking in the wrong place. A perverse joke.

Farewell to King Absolute

Taking us back to the ancient crossroads in Western thought. Is our “quest for knowledge” best left to the course initiated by Aristotle? To our single-minded focus on what matter can tell us? Or should we acknowledge its limits and pick up where Parmenides and Plato left off? By respecting instead of disparaging Mind and its sixth sense. By applying explanation from Logic-Love to insights from intuition. Even if they are spontaneous, subjective, impossible to replicate in a controlled environment, and therefore inaccessible to science. Because they aren’t “scientific.”

Might it also be appropriate to re-open Western thought to the teaching and example of Jesus from a new perspective? A perspective that makes a clean break from the arrogance of body-idolizing tribal “realism” that converted it into its own self-centered authoritarian image -- the absurdity and cruelty of King Absolute. And speaks to us with the voice of Logic-Love. The gentle loving kindness of Self-Awareness.

The Voice that speaks for itself to individual Minds through the gift of sixth sense. That’s living and working in the present through all who welcome it. Including the individual who took down Jesus' response to her call for Love, scribed A Course in Miracles, and shared it through the book's publication. A psychological departure from the rule of body's five senses no more unthinkable than the behavior of quanta. The miracle of another perspective from real Reality: Parents Logic married to Love helping their Child grow to maturity through its sixth sense. Because they Love their Child.  And us too, the projections of Choice that can part with its delusion and regain its freedom. That can choose again and bid farewell to King Absolute.

*Dashiell Hammett, The Maltese Falcon (Alfred A. Knopf, 1930)

John Wild's book, Introduction to Realistic Philosophy (Harper and Row 1948) (RP) has made a contribution to my thinking and thus to my forthcoming book, for which I am very grateful. However, as I hope these reflections will show, it makes a better case for my book than it does for his. [See "My Forthcoming Book" and "On Circular Reasoning" posted to this website 4/25/20] We agree on the need for "realistic" philosophy, but we disagree on the fundamental question of what's real. What's real for him is matter; what's real for me is Mind.

My understanding of what’s going on with us and our world is that the Child we are, our spiritual ancestor, was stripped of the knowledge base he depended on for free choice when he lost consciousness. He lost much else, besides, but here, in this world, his focus has been on rebuilding his knowledge base. Without it he is operating in the dark, and getting out of the dark, returning to the light of consciousness by exercising free choice, is what he must accomplish.

This provides the context for my understanding of RP, its contribution to this broader purpose. Its specific contribution is to the pursuit of knowledge through experimental and theoretical science, which has, until recently, relied exclusively upon sensory perception, because RP does provide an argument to support it, if inadvertently. Its argument, not coincidentally, joins with body-centered Church dogma which, through Thomas Aquinas, gave cover to science when other faiths did not.

“Inadvertently” because science seems to play hardly any part in RP. Einstein isn’t registered in its name index even though general relativity upended Newtonian concepts of absolute space and absolute time. This dealt a momentous blow to certainties about material reality that one theoretical physicist, Rovelli, has likened to “the stuff that dreams are made of.”

RP makes no mention of Einstein’s theory in its discussion of time, a significant omission which suggests that undermining dark-age enemies of science played little or no part in its motivation. RP’s declaration that “Time is to be sharply distinguished from spatial extension;” that it’s “a mental measure with a foundation in extra-mental reality,” [p. 347], that we experience a “now” that’s more definable than Einstein’s “present” that’s neither future nor past, [pp. 375-376] are at odds with the science of its day.

The injustice that RP seems intent upon righting is “idealistic philosophy,” the synthesis of “empiricism” and “rationalism” propagated by Immanuel Kant. Its exact offense was positing reality in the eye of the beholder, a subjectivist take on reality that made a bystander of the body and its senses. But where idealistic philosophy rates a rebuttal, “spiritualism which reduces the physical to the mental” [p. 400], is dismissed with nothing more than it’s “far removed from the common insight of mankind.” [p. 395]

Had RP hypothesized the existence of a spiritual reality its reasoning would, I think, have yielded an opposite result. This is because its own take on reality treats as extrinsic any material object outside the body that senses it. Thus, it can claim “objectivity;” it becomes a common-sense “objectivist” philosophy; and “facts” are its exclusive domain. Since this assumption is intertwined with our everyday perceptions and feelings, it rings true.

But were a spiritual entity given a voice, the logic behind it would quickly be revealed for the fallacy that it is. Bodies integral to a system of material appearances are logically unqualified to pass judgment on their own system’s reality, i.e. on themselves. To grant them this status – to include the knower in the known -- is to grant rationality to circular, self-referential reasoning, which is irrational. Of even greater concern to RP, it would substitute subjectivity for objectivity, the ultimate violation of its logic.

In the event, RP is at pains to keep this from happening. Not only is spiritual reality not allowed to challenge “the realistic analysis of hylomorphic substance,” [p. 400], RP doesn’t allow Plato, its co-founder, to interpret the meaning of his Allegory of the Cave in his own words. These are the words RP uses: “perfection,” “sound social order,” “social justice,” “jointly ordered, cooperative community,” “just community,” “unjust community,” “bad society.” “good society.” [pp. 173-174]

How can the primary issue with captives of deception imprisoned in a cave be about justice and not about appearances and reality? About truth? Here are Plato’s own words:

“[O]nce seen, [the form of the good] is inferred to be responsible for whatever is right and valuable in anything, producing in the visible region light and the source of life, and being in the intelligible region itself controlling source of truth and intelligence. . . . When the mind’s eye is fixed on objects illuminated by truth and reality, it understands and knows them.” [Quoted in Wapnick pp. 298-299, my emphasis added]

“[O]ur true lover of knowledge naturally strives for reality” is a statement attributed to Plato in an earlier passage about Plato’s philosopher-kings, “the truly wise,” in Wapnick’s words, “who. . . no longer value the appearance of the Good but the Good itself; the reality illuminated by the truth and not the shadows.” [Wapnick p. 300. Wapnick’s and my emphasis added] Socrates, killed by Athenians, was the model for the freed prisoner “because he tried to awaken in them the truth of the difference between appearance and reality.” [Wapnick p. 298, my emphasis added]

If they relied on its interpretation alone, RP’s readers would not only miss the gist of Plato’s allegory, they would be mis-led. They would be victims of an intellectual cover-up that presents itself as beholden to the highest ideals of reason, common sense, and objectivity. Manipulation of facts is a predatory manipulation of people who depend on facts to make informed choices, a betrayal of their trust, and a sign of disrespect that would make fools of them.

The basis of RP’s logic is that if a thing appears real to body’s senses then it must be real. There’s no possibility that anything internal or external to our minds can be real that isn’t detectable by the body’s senses, an assumption about the place of the body in all of Creation that is breathtakingly ego-centric.

If I were to interview one of the shackled prisoners who occupied Plato’s Cave about what he was observing, I would expect a near-perfect articulation of Realistic Philosophy, a viewpoint that’s firmly committed to the logic of the Cave and oblivious to anything outside it. I would expect something on the order of, “What I observe in these flickering shadows is real because it appears real.”

The point of Plato’s allegory is to suggest that appearances may deceive, and, indeed, when an occupant frees himself to discover the reality outside, he confirms it. Plato’s philosopher king, modeled on the prisoner liberated from the deception of appearances, is possessed of an awareness supported by reasoning derived not from ignorance and misapprehension but from knowledge and truth. Elevating his subjects’ minds out of ignorance and misapprehension into the light of knowledge and truth – liberating them from appearances through reason and virtue, – was the inspiration for the philosopher king’s rule and for Plato’s Academy.

On the strength of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave alone I disagree with RP's claim that Plato "co-founded” its school of thought. [p. 379]

In another instance of selective truth-telling, RP begs off anything to do with “theology.” But it can’t resist noting that it accords with body-centered Church dogma and in so doing takes sides in theological controversy:

"Genuine Christianity. . . has much more in common with authentic materialistic thought. . . than with that extremely widespread spiritualism, , , which tries to deny matter and other basic facts of life. How surprised most of our contemporaries would be if they could discover the fact that Christianity, , , is actually a hardheaded campaign for the conquest of ourselves and the world we inhabit, , , , [F]or nothing is of more decisive importance for a people and its civilization than its religion, and how this is understood." [pp. 234-235]

Though gratuitous, RP’s acceptance of added cultural legitimacy from Western civilization’s most influential religious institution would be acceptable were it not for the fact that it’s also disingenuous. “Hardheaded” Church dogma contains an obvious contradiction which RP fails to mention: miracles. Miracles whose purpose was to demonstrate that our world, our material universe, our “laws” of science, our bodies and their senses, are illusory.

The author of miracles inspired Gnostic Christianity that was unpersuaded by Church dogma and was forcibly suppressed as a result. He has restated his message in A Course in Miracles, a unique system of thought and practical guidance based not on unquestioned faith but on tightly-reasoned philosophy and psychology. Its affirmation of Jesus’ miracles and their purpose was not available at the time RP was published, but the elephant was certainly in the room. How could this aspect of Church dogma not have drawn RP’s attention?

The answer must be that RP would have been obliged to confront a central article of Church followers’ faith and thus potentially offend many in its audience. The Church would be obliged to weigh in, and “the common insight of mankind” would be common no more. It would have been better had RP given spiritualism a hypothetical voice – the voice, say, of authority, reason, and compassion from Conscious Mind, like A Course in Miracles -- not only to correct philosophical subjectivity in its argument for sensory perception but also to practice the Platonic virtue of honesty.

Acknowledging that there were competing versions of Christianity; that “genuine Christianity” – Church dogma – achieved dominance only by force; and miracles that were part of dogma and opposing theologies flatly contradict RP, would be honest.

RP: I’m sorry, dear reader, but Realistic Philosophy says your revered miracles could not have happened. You’ll have to try another religion.
Believer: Yeah, well how about trying another philosophy?

Reliance on sensory perception is being questioned among theorists, I suspect, in many fields, and so it’s highly unlikely that RP could be put out there today with a straight face. Its author will have read books by Becker and Rovelli on quantum physics, a field whose discoveries are so bizarre that physicists protective of their careers steer clear of it. The search for quantum gravity -- the synthesis of general relativity / cosmology with quantum mechanics -- shreds “the common insight of mankind.” Neuroscience going back to the 19th century has questioned RP’s notion that consciousness resides in the brain. A material world that has become strange, incomprehensible, disorderly, and threatening can no longer anchor our sense of place and familiarity.

But why rely on RP’s argument to refute it when sensory perception can do better? Let it run its own course with cosmic reality and it will self-destruct.

The “potency” that RP depends upon for many of its conclusions is Energy. The Energy that powers our universe originated with Logic that powers Creation. The Big Bang was a release of energy from Reality-Consciousness – from the irrational thought of splitting up the oneness of Being -- that initially empowered our material, illogical universe. It is an imagined break with the real Logic-Energy of Creation, a disconnection, not a connection. Which implies that it is not a real-living current that can maintain its force but an illusory-dying current. It’s the flip side of real Energy -- flip side like everything else in our universe, the opposite of what’s real. Which explains why our illogical, illusory universe is in a state of entropy, destined to decay, tending toward disorder, and becoming inert.

This means that all the forms of energy – nuclear strong and weak, electromagnetic, and gravity – will gradually weaken until matter will no longer be produced by energy and its components will no longer hold together, from the quanta level on up. When the energy that’s locked up in matter dissipates, bodies will be long gone and nothing will be left that’s detectable by their senses. The Achilles Heel of RP is its reliance on "potency," i.e. energy, that eventually will abandon it. So, all that's really needed to put it to rest is time-lapse photography and a lot of time on our hands.

While it supports the physical sciences RP can also be appropriated by a less enlightened pursuit. This would be “objectivism,” the personal credo of Ayn Rand and her libertarian followers who noisily denied the legitimacy of any interest beyond individual self-interest. They suffered the handicap of narcissists unable to see beyond themselves, to accept the presence of a larger, communal self-interest, that makes governance in the public interest, for fairness, justice, peace, and civilization possible.

Objectivism makes a close match with the thinking behind “conservatism” that masks its will toward unopposed power, the license for its followers to do whatever they want behind the flag of “freedom:” their freedom to take away your freedom. It’s a prescription for fascist dictatorship which frees the dictator to take himself and his captive audience to the bottom of a sea of contradictions and “appearances.”

The reasoning that supports RP is that of a human mind corrupted by irrationality – the ego and its purpose to deceive. RP’s reasoning is flawed because its knowledge base is both unintentionally and intentionally mischaracterized and omits critical material that has since come to light. RP’s reasoning is flawed because it has been invaded by the ubiquitous manipulations of power relations – by self-interest in our state of competition and conflict. And RP’s reasoning is flawed because it intentionally compromises with the truth, not the minor infraction of everyday discourse but a betrayal of Philosophy’s Hippocratic Oath.

The reasoning that supports Jesus’ A Course in Miracles is reasoning from Conscious Mind, the spiritual perspective that could have corrected RP’s flawed reasoning had it been given the hypothetical hearing that the logic of philosophy, science, and fairness demanded. ACIM’s knowledge base lies beyond human access, but it invites the reader to dismantle the logic of its guidance with reason. After over thirty years of reflection, this reader so far cannot. The ubiquitous manipulations of self-interest are beneath it, but this is not to say that it lacks self-interest when all Creation is composed of self-interest. The difference lies in the logic, the definition, of “Self” that is Reality, that is Truth. Guidance from ACIM that cannot compromise with the Truth, by definition, that cannot betray itself, leads to the Truth about ourselves, our Worth and our Purpose, that cannot be compromised.

The search for scientific “knowledge” was supposed to end successfully before it reached the end of useful experimentation. But quantum physics-gravity requires that inquiry extend beyond physical experiments into philosophy, which takes us back to Plato’s unfinished business, the philosophic system that he never fully developed. It takes us back to the unified theory of everything that Einstein never finished.

A Course in Miracles accomplishes what Plato, Einstein, and experimental science have failed to do: construct a coherent thought system that isn’t shot through with contradictions and irrationality. It accomplishes this through uncompromising non-dualism, the proposition that between Mind and matter only Mind can be real.

It must have been in the backs of the minds of those who have clung to sensory perception –the learning disciplines, the professions, politics, the arts, communications, religion -- that it’s the first and last line of defense for civilization. They must have feared what populist politics, pop culture, the internet, and social media have wrought, a breakdown of consensus around reality, truth, morality, and the institutions – the “establishment” -- charged with maintaining it. Fears around replacing a paradigm as ingrained in the human mind as sensory perception are not to be taken lightly. The stability it has provided cannot be taken for granted.

This could have been the larger purpose of RP’s case against “idealism” and “spiritualism,” philosophies it considers subjective and irrational and, therefore, unrealistic, a threat not only to the reign of sensory perception but also to common sense, learning, and civilization. It takes its place among the Child’s evolving experiments with regaining its knowledge base for informed choice, a flawed product of the insights, the threats, the irrationality, and the politics of its time, but a worthy cause, nonetheless. It deserves respect.

Works cited:
Kenneth Wapnick, Love Does Not Condemn: the World, the Flesh, and the Devil According to Platonism, Christianity, Gnosticism, and 'A Course in Miracles' (Foundation for A Course in Miracles 1989)
Adam Becker, What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics (Basic Books 2018)
Carlo Rovelli, Reality Is Not What It Seems: The Journey to Quantum Gravity (Riverhead Books 2017)
A Course in Miracles (Foundation for Inner Peace 1975)

Dave Harrison
May 5, 2020