COMMENSAL ISSUE 98

ABSTRACT

Regrettably, modern Man has been so busy trying to rape Nature in his Procrustean bed of conceited egocentrism, that he has neglected ethics and thus he failed to keep an eye on the lid of Pandora's box. Now the lid has slipped and the emerging and not entirely unpredictable global crisis increasingly threatens survival itself. Consensus is the prerequisite to successful world federalism, which necessitates a transcendent common denominator; which, considering the magnitude of divergences, can only be God. However, traditional concepts of God can no longer be maintained in view of recent scientific advances. The lessons of History are painful, but they unequivocally teach that our worst enemies are ourselves, especially in terms of anthropomorphic ignorance and anthropocentric arrogance. Belief leads to misbelief and righteousness turns into self-righteousness in the absence of reliable and valid external yardsticks. Subjective truth must yield to objective knowledge; i.e. God must become proven fact, so that ethical legislation may become absolutely trustworthy. Is that possible? If so, how?

This pilot paper presents a tentative blueprint based on many years of scientific research using standard hypothetico-deductive methodology supplemented by inductive efforts at synthesis, in however an informal workshop fashion. After touching base in theosophy and ethics, theological criteria are reviewed and reformulated in view of modern science. It is shown that the dozen criteria, if independently satisfied by observational, logical, mathematical, and experimental kinds of proofs, as applicable; are both necessary and sufficient to scientifically prove the existence and the relevance of a transnatural and transrational entity, albeit devoid of humanoid features. Depending on one's orientation, this entity may be called Ultimate Reality, or the Absolute, or God- the exact terminology is not very important. Fundamental isomorphisms and one-to-one functional correspondences among logic, mathematics, physics, and psychology provide the essentialist means of reestablishing God's cosmic legislative authority without diminishing free will and human responsibility. This authority guarantees the reliability and validity of transcendental ethics and perhaps shows a viable road toward a better future for all Mankind.

It is hoped, without the slightest presumption or dogmatism, that this paper will generate enough interest to provoke much future research along the lines of the suggested perspective. Criticisms are invited and welcome. If we get together and work hard, maybe we can neutralize Pandora's box, appease Nature, and rediscover childlike innocence. Perhaps we should...

We need knowledge and we need love. What we don't need, is the dangerous quarrel between the two, which increasingly threatens us with fratricidal and suicidal madness. The purpose of this presentation is a preliminary progress report, covering many years of private research into the foundations of religion, philosophy, logic, mathematics, physics, and psychology in an effort at possible synthesis. Based on this initial exploration, a program is herein sketched, in order to get rid of the disharmony, change the perspective, and maybe even push the horizons of knowledge beyond Virtual Reality, beyond the limits of the Universe. An ambitious program of this magnitude requires a lot of teamwork. Only by establishing a universal common denominator, which guarantees knowledge free from cognitive dissonance and love free from moral corruption, can a much overdue paradigm shift take place (compliments to Thomas Kuhn!); and both our knowledge and love needs be properly fulfilled way beyond the XXIst century.

There have been recent efforts at eliminating cognitive dissonance. In theoretical physics in particular, there has been a rash upsurge of synthetic attempts, called G.U.T.s for Grand Unifying Theories. Also called "Theories of Everything", so far, they have not been terribly successful, despite some brilliant results, for example in combining the fundamental forces of Nature and interesting efforts toward Quantum Gravity. The magic common denominator remains stubbornly elusive. Of course, one is sorely tempted to wonder why.

If all else fails, read the instructions. Modern science has shown that we are the exception, not the norm. Yet our cognitve-emotional world remains structured as though the Universe revolved around us. We still evaluate all reality relative to us, even though we should know better by now. We have to go beyond ourselves, even beyond the Universe, to catch a glimpse of true Eternity.

How do we transcend the obvious and penetrate unfathomable depths? By first realizing that the world is not what it seems. Did you know, for example, that color does not exist? Color is what we see, thanks to our neocortical evolutionary past; but independently of us, there's no such thing. There are different shades of grey; as the various frequencies and wavelengths around the middle of the electromagnetic spectrum go about their business without giving a tinker's damn about our ignorant quarrels and arrogant ramblings. Similarly, perhaps 10% of the Universe is observable matter-energy transformations. The rest, the overwhelming majority, is simply out of the visual range and must be dealt with in ways that go way beyond direct sense-perception.

What emerges from such considerations is that there is an independent reality in contemptuous disregard of all our wishful thinking. General Relativity in the macrocosmos and Quantum Mechanics in the microcosmos have shown that the Universe is finite. It may be that beyond the limits of the finite Universe is the infinite reality of the Absolute. Think of finite sets as subsets of a single, universal, infinite Master set. Obviously, the finite cannot dictate to the infinite any more than the temporal could dictate to the eternal or the child to the parent. The infinite Absolute, being the source and sink of the finite Relative, must be the norm or the baseline.

It does not matter what we call the Absolute. What matters is that it may independently exist by self-necessity and self-sufficiency. Also, as it may give rise to the Universe and all matter-energy events, it may be seen as a kind of transnatural and transrational, albeit nonmaterial and nonconscious entity. Consciousness is a human feature, thanks to our neocortical evolutionary past, basic animal self-awareness notwithstanding. In short, it is not consciousness that makes the Absolute the real, rather than the man-made, God.

Three sets of criteria, iff substantiated, make the above mentioned Absolute the real God. These are existence, transcendence, and relevance criteria, in this order of significance, respectively. Existence criteria are primary or sine qua non, transcendence criteria are secondary or contingent, while relevance criteria are tertiary or optional, in terms of indispensability. The first set, the scientific-cosmocentric group comprises omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, and omniefficience. The second set, the philosophical-anthropocentric group includes continuity, infinity, eternity, and perfection. Finally, the third set, the religious-anthropomorphic group consists of wisdom, morality, providence, and personality. All this is subject to proof or refutation, i.e. Q.E.D. - Q.E.R. This dozen criteria, if properly satisfied, is both necessary and sufficient to make God not only absolute truth but proven fact as well.

God must be a proven fact, if not the proven fact par excellence, in order to admit absolute legislative authority, without which ethics is impotent. Cosmic morality presupposes a cosmic lawgiver, albeit in the sense of source-and-sink causality and determinism, rather than in the sense if biblical naivete. We are transient products of natural reality, which is a transient product of ultimate reality. This absolute reality is thus the final court of appeal, the patterns of which determine the Laws of Nature and provide a forum of ultimate evaluation of all norm, all conduct. Without some sort of absolute yardstick, it may be subjectivism to condemn Evil, for example; any and all moral indignation notwithstanding. Equipped with an objective yardstick our ethics could become transcendental and trustworthy; and then, by intuitively evident self-commitment, rather than coercion, Mankind would get realistic survival chances into the indefinite future.

So- we need God as the common denominator to unite humanity and survive any and all calamity and maybe even prosper and thrive in the long run. However, first we ought to purge our thinking of the twin evils of anthropomorphic ignorance and anthropocentric arrogance. Then, we should reestablish God's credibility by means of the discrediting agent itself, i.e. Science, vouchsafed by Philosophy. Scientific-philosophical methodology is our safeguard with some caveats. For instance, Aristotelian logic is not necessarily applicable beyond the virtual reality of the observable Universe. Mathematics is man-made, and perhaps 10-15% of it is applicable to the Universe. Much of modern Physics is suffering from the (in)famous Tool Illusion, be that the weak or strong versions of the so-called "Anthropic Principle", or the "unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics"; begging the pardons of John Barrow, Frank Tipler, and Eugene Wigner, respectively.

However, if the Absolute were only some kind of ubiquitous forcefield-cum-total existence, most people could not care less. Human relevance requires, as yet, certain religious notions, such as personality, providence, etc.; but they must be carefully weened from man-made features, lest the costly mistakes of History be repeated all over again. The science of Psychology, if given the proper transcendental perspective, can effectively help to bridge Physics and Ethics, as seen for example, in recent developments of Cognitive Psychology, Artificial Intelligence, and Human Engineering. Such eclectic and essentialist world-view as implied above, cannot be anthropocentric- it can only be cosmocentric or theocentric, if you will. Hence, and given the grave problems facing Mankind, scientific theosophy and scientific ethics are not only intellectual curiosities and emotional desirabilities, but pragmatic necessities as well. Why? Because without credible God, existential absurdity yields but suicidal nihilism; yet with God as proven fact, the world becomes manageable, maybe even peaceful in serene harmony. Yesterday's utopia may thus become tomorrow's reality, in a tangible and truly worthwhile sense.

For the present purposes, let us regard theosophy as philosophy of God. Because no verifiable evidence is available, it is not possible to talk about any "science" of God; and not much more than indirect inquiry bordering on metaphysical speculation is possible. However, speculative metaphysics does not have to be idle or sterile; especially when using a scientific approach. The built-in self-correction of scientific methodology provides for reliability and validity. It's just that God has never been the subject of scientific scrutiny, even though Science has proven itself as the epistemic method par excellence. Somehow science has remained aloof - perhaps heeding the warning of Sir Isaac Newton: "Physics, beware of metaphysics!". Theosophy can be approached by religion, philosophy, and science.

Religious approaches to theosophy are confined to theological speculation. As such, they are severely hampered by dubious initial assumptions and premises. For example, direct or indirect revelation, direct or indirect divine concern, meaningfulness of ritual, etc. It all makes good sense as long as the starting grounds are not called into question. Afterwards, it's endless debates.

Philosophical approaches to theosophy are usually concerned with ontological speculation. The reason is simple: epistemic inquiry presupposes ontic substantiation. In other words, we can hardly inquire about God's nature before God's existence is settled. There had been various attempts to prove God's existence from pure reason and to deduce God's nature from features of perceived reality. Splendid examples might include the relevant works of Descartes, Pascal, Spinoza, Berkeley, Locke, Hume, Kant, Hegel, etc. Alas, none had been terribly successful in this context, due to either faulty premises or fallacious reasonings or both.

Scientific approaches to theosophy are possible, as long as one knows what to look for and how to look. First, we need to gather theological criteria from available scientific data, while deliberately avoiding religious bias and subjectivism. Once we know what criteria must be satisfied, we can use the powerful methods of science to find out if there is something that fulfills the criteria; and if so, what features or attributes might be appropriate. Objectivity and verifiability are the key words all along the line. Observational, logical, mathematical, and experimental kinds of proofs, as applicable, can all be used following standard hypothetico-deductive-inductive scientific methodology. Ultimately, the purpose of such inquiry is to establish cosmic legislative authority by showing where the laws of nature come from, how, and why. In short; scientific theosophy ought to produce cosmic morality, which may then serve as the template of human conduct.

By dictionary definition, ethics is the philosophy of human conduct, with emphasis on the determination of right and wrong and hence the principles of right conduct. For the present purposes, "ethics" and "morality" will be used almost interchangeably. Notice that in the absence of properly substantiated theological criteria, it is not possible to talk about "cosmic ethics" as such- which is why the less restrictive term "cosmic morality" is preferable for now.

Whenever we talk about ethics or morality, we ought to remind ourselves that most of that is man-made. Thousands of years of cultural evolution, socioeconomic pressures, and power politics have resulted in complex, confusing, and often conflicting legal systems at loggerheads with tribal lores and idiosyncrasies. Man-made ethics and morality are quite vulnerable to criticism. They are not terribly compelling. Several studies, for example in child psychology, have shown that actual behavior has well-nigh nothing to do with right or wrong. Rather, it hinges on the perceived likelihood of getting caught. In the absence of absolute ethical standards and in the presence of lousy practice based on questionable authority and inconsistent principles, our self-made morality more often than not deteriorates into appalling actual conduct.

Fortunately, there is also morality that is not man-made. Animals know how to live in natural harmony without the slightest malice, let alone evil. They never commit murder, as such, never engage in anything even remotely resembling criminal behavior. Somehow, their built-in mechanisms provide for self-regulatory behavioral patterns, as shown by many studies in animal psychology. Also, small children whose innocence and natural morality are uncorrupted as yet, are marvellously honest and fair. Uncorrupted conscience and natural law need no guns, no mighty armies, no unfair enforcement. Only in our corrupt world is Power the predominant factor.

However, if Might is Right, then Love has no place in this world, only sheer brutal force. The "law of the strongest" is a vulgarization of Darwinian principles, to justify- most of the time post-hoc or ex post facto- jungle morality in general and individual evil and malice and chicanery in particular. As shown by many studies in social psychology, punishment is ineffective and even counterproductive; only love has the real power of motivation and self-regulation. Love is thus the proper road to moral autonomy and maturity, when any kind of law enforcement is just obsolete. However, you cannot love what you don't understand. This is a crucial point for the present purposes. When we understand where natural law comes from, how and why, we can't help feelings of awesome reverence and joyful love. To put it succinctly, facing God we can't help proper conduct; this is our nature.

It is in our nature that our morality needs to be transcendental, reflecting the cosmic order of things, rather than the prevalent social order of things. In other words, human legislation ought to be extrapolated from cosmic jurisprudence; supplemented by certain social considerations, rather than the other way around. The greatest stumbling block of man-made law and ethics is imperfect authority. Had kings and high priests been the factually true representatives of God on this planet, we could have and we would have lived in a perfect world all along the line. The bitter lesson of all History is, however, that no king can ever be god, because only God is king.

The cosmic legislative authority of God stems from God's absolute nature. Having given rise to all of the Universe, past, present, and future; of course, God is the ultimate ethical authority. However, this can only be the case iff God exists in the first place.

Is there such entity? Does God exist? Is God merely a superstitious remnant of primitive religion, an asylum of ignorance, fear, and wishful thinking?

Trying to answer these very pregnant questions, we might first look into religions. God is their business, after all. But they contradict each other, even themselves, while each claims to be the only true one. Regrettably, we thus get no farther than the God of the Bible, the Koran, etc. But these are so naive and obsolete, that we must look deeper.

Next, we might turn to serious theology and philosophy. We are rewarded by several criteria that an entity must satisfy in order to be God. Among these, on the side of traditional theology, we find benevolence, providence, personality, etc.; generally congruent with the "Heavenly Father" image. But this concept is a leftover from ancient times when the Earth was flat with Heaven above and Hell below; and as such, it has been discredited by modern Science. Philosophy, not being bound to such naive and obsolete imagery, fares a little better; and provides about a dozen criteria by means of which God's existence and nature might be established. However, philosophy has not been able to provide unequivocal answers. At best, we get a tautology; if God exists, then God exists- which is hopeless circularity. One is thus left in a quandary; either God does not exist, or God's existence must be approached in ways that transcend even serious theology and philosophy.

To get us on the right track, let's ask a crucial question: suppose Mankind does not exist and never has. Would God still be around? In other words, is God's existence independent of humanity, now or ever? If no, then the conclusion is inescapable: Man created God. If yes, on the other hand, then we must look much deeper.

For hundreds of years by now, most new knowledge has been produced by Science. It has proven itself eminently qualified to penetrate Nature's secrets and beyond. Splitting the atom, superconductivity, lasers, nanotechnology, quantum cosmology, etc. are cases in point. Therefore, it might not be unreasonable to ask whether Science could be enlisted in the quest for God.

As a starting point in our scientific quest for God, let's define God as the metaphysical category known as the Absolute. What are those criteria that make God God? Distilled from oceans of scientific data and philosophical considerations, these are (Table 1):

Omnipotence and omnipresence are self-explanatory. However, omniscience does not necessarily imply consciousness in the human sense; rather, a kind of awareness well known from elasticity theory and continuum mechanics, whereby a lake is "aware" of even the tiniest pebble thrown into it. Also, omniefficience or universal efficiency, refers not so much to efficiency associated with classical heat engines of the Carnot type; rather, to those natural economy and parsimony principles that are well known in optimization and minimax principles, least time, least action, the Hamiltonian, etc.

Existence criteria are sine qua non, without which all propositions are meaningless. Transcendence criteria are relative to Man, i.e. as seen from our vantage point. Relevance criteria are required to make God "accessible" and "palatable" to us, without which we would not know how to relate to God, at least for the time being.

Most of these criteria can be extrapolated from our existing knowledge, as long as we carefully filter out man-made features. This is particularly important among the tertiary attributes. Although wisdom, morality, providence, and personality make sense relative to us, and they might in fact be described by entirely different notions x-centuries from now; but they would still be manifestations of the same phenomena and refer to the same criteria of the Absolute.

These criteria are independent of us and our history, cultural evolution notwithstanding. Any observer on any other planet in any galaxy should be able to extrapolate the same criteria from painstaking scientific scrutiny or its equivalent epistemic activity. How? By analysis and synthesis of longitudinal and cross-sectional features of reality, establishing patterns, and rolling up causal chains and evolutionary continua.

Everything changes, everything moves, all the time. This utterly trivial observation is perhaps the most transcendental fact about the Universe and all its contents, past, present, and future. It's just that things do not change at the same rate or follow the same pattern- which is why, according to Science, stability is apparent or transient, and change is dynamic and all-pervasive.

Slow, inconspicuous, long-term unfolding change is known as evolution; while its inverse is involution. We are in the evolutionary or expanding phase of the Universe, according to the standard Big Bang model of cosmology; and after maximum expansion there should be an involutionary or contracting phase, then a Big Crunch, another Big Bang, and so on, ad infinitum. Although competing cosmologies are available, as represented by the steady-state model for example; for the present purposes let's accept the Big Bang model as our working hypothesis. Most evidence supports this model in excellent agreement with observed patterns of change.

This model shows that change occurs either in short-term or long-term fashion or both. Short-term change, generally by the mechanism of negative feedback, adjusts processes toward stability and the maintenance of the status quo, as for instance in homeostasis. Long-term change, generally by the mechanism of positive feedback, adapts processes toward evolutionary growth, as for instance in homeodynamis. Gravitation incompletely balances radiation, homeostasis incompletely balances homeodynamis, involution incompletely balances evolution- all because we are in the expansion phase of the Universe. These patterns of change are determined by open-systems, nonequilibrium thermodynamics, as shown by General Systems Theory.

Thus, evolutionary changes are not random, accidental, or mutational. They are fundamentally driven and determined by nonequilibrium thermodynamics. Minimal entropy at the Big Bang means maximum energy concentration, whereas maximum entropy halfway between Big Bangs and Big Crunches implies minimum energy concentration. The entropy of open systems may increase, decrease, or stay relatively constant, provided that the entropy of the total system, which is one or more open systems within an overall, closed system, increases.

Therefore, an overall closed system, in which all conservation principles hold, containing lots of open systems in dynamic quasi-equilibria or nonequilibria, seems to be the most fitting conceptualization of Ultimate Reality. Virtual Reality as the proper subset of the universal set of Ultimate Reality, the temporal within the eternal, the finite within the infinite, the discrete within the continuous, the Relative within the Absolute, variable change within constant change, and so on; appear as various ways of referring to the same thing. In fact, we may perhaps think that the Universe is part and parcel of God; evolving from and returning to base after performing its cosmic role as energy transducer. Evolution is thus a continuous thermodynamic necessity.

We may even trace evolutionary continua from cultural to biological, from biochemical to geophysical, from planetary to stellar, from galactic to supragalactic, etc. all the way backward to the Big Bang. A full cycle between bangs and crunches seems to take about 50 billion years, which is a negligible blink by cosmic timescales, human foibles notwithstanding.

It is important to realize that Man is a product of biological and cultural evolution, in a dynamic, ever-changing fashion. Yet, being the integral product of Nature, Man is of course subject to cosmodynamic patterns and thermodynamic laws. Optimal function is a thermodynamic necessity, in terms of energy transduction-transformation efficiency. In short; whatever Man is and Man does, now or ever, are subject to optimal function constraints and energy-efficiency parameters and dynamic adaptation mechanisms. Man is an energy-dissipating machine.

Please, there is nothing demeaning or derogatory in this; no grounds for indignation, whatsoever. This is sober Science, obviating illusions and delusions that somehow, Man must be more than this; that consciousness and intellect represent some kind of "divine spark", etc. Man is not the crown of creation, Man is not Nature's finest, Man is not the semidivine governor of this world. Au contraire, Man is nothing special, but a perfectly normal, necessary, and transient phase of evolution. Man's cosmic dignity is neither more nor less than that of any other biological or nonbiological entity. Being integral parts of the Universe is nothing to complain about, but nothing to brag about, either. We are cosmic citizens called humans- and that is all we are, now or ever. Isn't that enough?

Man lives, evolves, and dies in his world. Man's built-in nature ensures that Man, consciously or not, strives toward optimal function in all his endeavors, from his minutest biochemical adjustments to his greatest rational-intellectual ambitions. Rationalization has definite survival value, as the unknown, the unexplained, is anxiety provoking; and anxiety paralyzes Man into helplessness. Anxiety reduction and functional optimization account for the necessity of religion, in psychophysical terms of cultural evolution.

All religion, from primitive to sophisticated, is a normal byproduct of cultural evolution. That's because ever since the dawn of humanity, in every society, Man has believed that there are forces outside Man's immediate experience which affect his fate and with which he must maintain relations so that he may prosper. Thus the strict ethical monotheism of Moses had quite naturally evolved from the mild ethical henotheism of Abraham; which in turn had quite naturally evolved from from the polytheism prevalent in ancient Mesopotamia, etc. Polytheism came from the primitive religion of animism, shamanism, ritualism, magic, and the like, as well known from many studies in anthropology, archeology, etc. However, while religion and philosophy gave complete world-views and ways of life to the ancients, these people were no fools. It is ugly presentism to depreciate flat-Earth myths, and the like. In their time, those myths were entirely normal rationalizations of unexplained reality. Our ancestors made sense of their world the best they could. By today's knowledge, they were ignorant; just as by tomorrow's knowledge we are ignorant. The psychophysical need to rationalize reality is ubiquitous and parallels human neocortical and cultural evolution.

Having thus rolled up evolutionary continua we have arrived at the limits of the Universe without Heaven, Hell, angels, demons, or any such naivete. God is thus neither some kind of benevolent Heavenly Father, nor a sort of disembodied Master Spirit floating "out there" somewhere. If God is to be anywhere at all, we must transcend the Universe and go beyond its limits altogether.

5. Limits of the Universe

Special Relativity has established the speed of light as the upper limit of the Universe. Tachyons, if demonstrated, may push this limit even farther. The lower limit is absolute zero, i.e. 0 degrees Kelvin. Neither limit can be reached, only asymptotically approached, especially by hyperbolic functions. Further, Einstein's General Relativity has shown that the Universe is finite yet unbound, having positive curvature by the non-Euclidean geometry of Riemann and Minkowski. Together with the expansion of space by virtue of Hubble's law, the Big Bang cosmology has arisen within these limits.

It is possible to imagine an inflating sphere, whose surface activity would correspond to our expanding Universe. Because the geometry is non-Euclidean and because Quantum Mechanics insists on probabilities and lack of determinism, it has become fashionable to reject any query as to what lies inside or outside the sphere, or where the Big Bang came from, and the like. However, in recent times, theoretical physics has become increasingly worried about throwing out the baby with the bath. From superstrings to grand theories of everything, there are research efforts to rehabilitate determinism and reach beyond the Universe.

The mathematical methods of abstract topology in general and tensor-differentiable manifolds in particular, among others, make it possible to transcend the limits of the Universe. Obviously, only mathematical modelling can do that. But from an inductively well-formulated mathematical model testable hypotheses and physical predictions may be deduced; which then may be tested and verified by observational and experimental studies. In this indirect fashion, the Absolute becomes accessible. Similarly to invisible wind, Ultimate Reality may be studied by not what it is but what it does, in our world of Virtual Reality.

Between the floor of 0 degrees Kelvin and the ceiling of the speed of light is the fabric of spacetime. Evolutionary continua take place within these limits, as well as within minimax expansions-condensations. Altogether, all matter-energy transformations within spacetime and the limits of the Universe make up our "bubble" of Virtual Reality, as it were.

However, this Virtual Reality cannot be the final word. Nonequilibrium thermodynamics, nonconservative processes, and many directional phenomena indicate the so-called "Arrows of Time". These arrows prove that Virtual Reality can neither be self-contained, nor self-sufficient; for it is unable to account for equilibrium thermodynamics, conservative processes, and nondirectional phenomena, i.e. by itself.

Therefore, external causality has to be invoked. Classical physics conceptualized Ultimate Reality as matter in motion, as minimal particles akin to billiard balls move around in absolute space. But it was unable to explain where they came from and why those balls move.

Modern physics has completely revolutionized these notions. Relativity Theory in the macrocosmos and Quantum Mechanics in the microcosmos have shown that the Newtonian world-view is incomplete at best, naive at worst. Between our immediate visual world and the limits of measurement set by Special Relativity as well as Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle; there is an "onion of matter", each skin of which represents a different level of reality. Once the boundaries become blurred, Virtual Reality stops and Ultimate Reality begins.

It is thus not possible to visualize what Virtual Reality within the overall framework or context of Ultimate Reality looks like. All we can say is that relative to us, Virtual Reality is mostly rational; but Ultimate Reality is trans-rational. For us, rationality is predominant, because our nature so demands. But that's us, due to our neocortical and cultural evolution. Ultimate Reality may very well be rational, irrational, both, or none. While we may not visualize it, at least we can approach it with transcendental logic, mathematics, physics, and psychology.

Classical or Aristotelian logic is based on visual immediacy. Its laws are abstractions of patterns of observed reality. The Law of Identity, the Law of Non-Contradiction, and the Law of the Excluded Middle form the irreducible basis on which traditional logic, geometry, and mathematics are built. They are so well known and so deeply entrenched, that they are usually referred to as the Laws of Thought. This logic is two valued or dichotomous; i.e. it only admits true or false, mutually exclusive categories.

For many centuries, classical logic has reigned supreme. However, in the last hundred and fifty years or so, non-Euclidean geometry, as pioneered by Gauss, Bolyai, and Lobachevsky, has cast doubt on notions of infallibility. Mathematics has rediscovered irrationality and absurdity. Cantor's hierarchy of infinities and transfinite sets, for example; or Lord Russell's paradoxes and antinomies were major blows to complacency in logic and mathematics. Goedel's Undecidability Theorem, Lukasiewicz's multivalued logic, the rise of complex modal-intensional logics, fuzzy logic, quantum logic, etc., have shown that classical Aristotelian logic is limited to our world of sense-perception.

Because its validation hinges on observable reality, classical logic is ab ovo anthropocentric. Relative to us, the observable Universe stops at visual limits, even if vision is stretched by telescopes and microscopes. Thereafter, mathematics and quantum logic allow some further extensions and logical extrapolations; but soon, serious blurring indicates that we have arrived at the limits of even potential observability, i.e. we have reached the outer boundaries of Virtual Reality.

How do we go beyond these frontiers? Well, a little reflection shows that since neither two-valued logic nor its multivalued extensions can do the job, maybe we should turn the other way and look for single-valued logic. Because we intend to broach the Absolute, this single value can only be true. Like the absolute value of any number, which can only be positive; the Absolute cannot be false, only true. In short; at this level of reality, things can only be factually true, i.e. absolutely true.

Transcendental or single-valued logic should reduce to classical logic on our side of the blurred mode of existence. In the region of the Absolute, only transcendental or absolute logic is applicable; and its major tools are implications and syllogisms that can yield only true conclusions. What it all means is that in the world of the Absolute things forever change yet they forever remain the same; however inconsistent that might seem.

Based on similar considerations, transcendental mathematics may be built in order to broach the Absolute. Here, the key word is generality. For example, in abstract algebra, semigroups have much greater generality than groups, rings, lattices, and fields. Or, in set theory, topological spaces have much greater generality, than metrizable, metric, and Euclidean spaces. Obviously, even without Occam's razor, with greater generality comes greater simplicity and elegance.

The complex number field, which is presently the most complete one, may be further extended by inequalities and transcendental logic to yield two new number fields. These may be termed general and absolute number fields, respectively; and the standard field axioms modified accordingly. Then, by further simplification of structures, semi-lattices and semigroups emerge, whose generality allows applications in the world of the Absolute. Complex inequalities and transcendental logic thus lead to transcendental mathematics.

However, to model the Absolute with transcendental mathematics, we need three pillars. One is a strictly ordered set of infinite point-instants in topogeneous or semi-topogeneous orders. The other is the above mentioned new number systems and their abstract algebraic structures. The third is an associated vector space, which could be a tensor-differentiable manifold. The resultant absolute spacetime model, standing on such tripod, leads us to transcendental physics without reference frames or coordinate systems, inertial or otherwise.

Spacetime, matter, and field are the ultimate categories of present physical theorizing both in macrophysics and microphysics. However, once we reach the blurred mode of existence, the categories become indistinct. Hence, there might be a fundamental reality of which these categories are but different aspects or manifestations, depending on approach and focus. To reach this fundamental or ultimate reality, one needs to fuse the categories into a single entity; a single, all-pervasive absolute substance.

Imagine, if you will, a box around the Universe. It would thus be filled with spacetime, matter, and field. Now, let's take them out. What's left? Total vacuum, you say? No- simply nothing. Absolute nihil, if you like. For total vacuum is a physical impossibility, much like completely empty space; and even if it were possible, the Universe would remain unexplained. So, instead of taking them out, let's 'melt' or 'fuse' them into a single, invisible, nonmaterial substance. Akin to perfect fog, this substance is perfectly homogeneous and isotropic; yet it contains all potentialities, within its limiting box.

Now let's get rid of the top, bottom, and sides of the box. Then, the perfectly homogenous and isotropic substance extends to infinity yet ipso facto remains a closed system; and eternally at that, in every possible dimension. Absolute continuity is implied thereby, together with absolute perfection. Because the Absolute gives rise to the Universe from Big Bangs to Big Crunches, it must of course be omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, as well as omniefficient; subject to proof or disproof.

Proof may be in four different kinds; observational, logical, mathematical, and experimental. Inductively extrapolated from macrophysics-microphysics data, there are many observations directly or indirectly supporting the above sketch. Logical and mathematical kinds of proofs may be forthcoming along the lines of the above sketched perspective, keeping transcendentality and generality requirements in mind. For example, the indicated mathematical model would establish a one-to-one structural-functional correspondence between point-instants and physical spacetime. Mathematical space may be regarded as a system of continuous, unlimited points in series, an ordered set of infinite numbers. These points in motion would correspond to physical spacetime and constitute a kind of universal forcefield, the gradient of which would then explain Big Bangs-Big Crunches. From this model, testable hypotheses may be deduced and examined; whereby the criterion of empirical verifiability is satisfied. Even experimental proof and disproof become feasible, as and when applicable. When the four kinds of proofs, independently as well as in concert, yield positive results, then we will have reached the Absolute, and factually at that.

All this is very cute, you might demur; but not terribly exciting. After all, who cares about some impersonal force-field, however pervasive and all-mighty? What does it have to do with us, now or ever?

The human relevance of the Absolute comes from the simple fact that we are integral products of the Universe. As sketched above, the Absolute, in turn, is the source-and-sink of the Relative; i.e. the Universe and all that's within, including humankind. In a structural-functional sense, we are subject to the Laws of Nature, which, in turn, are based on the patterns of the Absolute. In short, our modus vivendi should be in complete harmony with the modus operandi of the Absolute.

Thousands of years of cultural evolution preceded by millions of years of neocortical evolution seem to indicate that the mind cannot be independent of the body; i.e. the mind is what the brain does. The mind is thus an epiphenomenon; an integral aspect of optimal brain function, which is an integral aspect of optimal bodily function. This, in turn, is directed and determined by thermodynamic efficiency requirements, all along the evolutionary lines. Our cosmic dignity is assured by our cosmic role without recourse to souls and spirits. Our biological life is but an utterly brief and transient stage in the continuity of our existence, spanning many millions of years, as part and parcel of the Absolute.

The Absolute may be seen as endowed with wisdom, morality, providence, and personality. Wisdom is evident from the postulate of transcendental logic, whereby the Absolute can only be true. Morality is evident from the omniefficient modus operandi of the Absolute. Providence is evident from the prudent economy aspects of the Universe, as manifestations of the wisdom of the Absolute. Finally, the totality of the aspects and the attributes of the Absolute make up what we may regard as personality. However, most emphatically, we must endow the Absolute with these features, due to our cognitive-emotional nature.

These attributes of the Absolute are optional, and important only inasmuch as they enable us, by transcendental psychology, to relate to the Absolute. How? Well, awesome reverence gives rise to joyful love once we realize that our ability to gather knowledge about the Absolute allows us to rediscover childlike innocence and to live in peaceful cosmic harmony. Why? Because no other modus vivendi is compatible with such knowledge, and because thanks to such knowledge, our ethics can be properly aligned with cosmic morality.

This alignment becomes increasingly urgent considering that religions have been unable to provide factually transcendent and intrinsically compelling ethical guidance, due to faulty authority and obsolete world-views; and thus they could not prevent the moral erosion and decadence of Mankind. Now we are at the brink of anarchy and chaos. Unless there arises new and vigorous moral leadership based on credible and trustworthy ethical authority, Mankind's long-term survival remains rather doubtful.

Science has proven itself eminently trustworthy. In its modest neutrality and objectivity, however, it is not terribly satisfying in terms of emotional needs. When you are burying your mother or trying to cope with cancer, for example, it is damned hard to find comfort and support in sober Science. Yet, just because it is hard, it does not have to be impossible. When we understand our cosmic role and however infinitesimally modest yet indispensable importance for the Absolute, our anxieties diminish and our fears become placated. Our eternity is guaranteed by our structural-functional relationships in the cosmic scheme of things. That functions may be thought of as operators in infinite-dimensional Hilbert space has no bearing on cosmic dignity. That immortality does not happen in some naive sense of biblical resurrection, but in the sense of absolute continuity, bothers only as long as factually true knowledge of Ultimate Reality is lacking. Once we know who and what we really are and why, we find peace. Only Science can answer such questions in terms that are reliable and valid.

Cosmic morality, by virtue of reflecting optimal efficiency patterns and modus operandi in the Universe, may serve as the template par excellence for human ethics. When you function optimally, you are operating with proper efficiency. This is hardly possible in slavery, squalor, or squander. When human conduct is in resonance with cosmic conduct, any and all evil becomes intuitively abhorrent; and we immediately realize that our fellow beings have the exact same rights and obligations. Being subject to cosmic morality does not diminish free will and responsibility at all. On the contrary, it highlights the urgent need to use our free will to choose peace, to choose decency, to choose love, and the like; so that we may all live in full cosmic responsibility and dignity. The quality of our lives matters, in terms of contributing to cosmic harmony or disharmony. Thus, cosmic morality is our link to the perfection of the Absolute.

Such considerations imply that we are for the perfection of the Absolute, and the Universe is as it is because of the perfection of the Absolute. These remarks contain, in a nutshell, just about all future guidelines and possibilities. True, we are energy dissipating machines, and the Universe is a necessary phase of cosmodynamics. But we can operate anywhere along the efficiency spectrum, even in the optimal range, if we so choose. Something strange happens at the point of optimal efficiency, similar to superconductivity and the like. When a pathetic ham-radio operator hits the right frequency, magnificent music bursts forth, sweeping away all previous cacophonies and chaotic noises. When Man functions with optimal efficiency, he is in tune with the Universe, he is in harmony with Eternity; he then best serves his God.

Therefore, we need to strive toward optimal efficiency in all our endeavors; and we ought to facilitate the same for all our fellow beings, without exception. By consciously aligning our ethics with cosmic morality and cultivating knowledge and love of the Absolute, we can ensure not only our survival, but a better future for our descendants as well. We may not always be successful in our efforts, especially at the beginning when so much housecleaning and refurnishing is required. But by understanding and accepting who and what and why we are, and by always striving for optimal efficiency and hoping for the best, we are building truly worthwhile futures. Finally, no matter what the future brings, please, never forget that all human wisdom may be summed up in two words: strive and hope.

In summary, it may be said that a preliminary synthesis by virtue of a common denominator, and a concurrent albeit rather tentative intellectual-moral paradigm shift have been sketched, perhaps in the sense of initial scaffolding. No point in illusions or delusions. Thus, it has been shown that the still prevailing anthropomorphic image of God is an ignorant illusion and the overbearing anthropocentric importance of Man is an arrogant delusion. Neither God, nor the Universe revolve around Man, as demonstrated by Science; human emotional immaturity and vulnerability notwithstanding. However, at the present stage of our evolution and turbulent emotional adolescence, we still need God- albeit in a modernized and updated fashion, in harmony with current Science as well as our basic nature. This updating and harmonization with Science is what the above mentioned re-patterning is all about, with the pragmatic aim of realigning human conduct with natural law, based on cosmic morality as the operational mode of the Absolute.

Following the thumbnail sketch of the subject-matter, actual discussion began with operationally defining theosophy as philosophy of God. Ethics has been defined as the philosophy of human conduct. Man-made ethics is a failure, as shown by the dangerous and difficult status quo. Fortunately, there is hope in morality that is not man-made. Bringing human ethics in line with cosmic morality requires absolute legislative authority, which cannot reside elsewhere than with God. Cosmic morality can be discerned from cosmodynamic patterns. However, real knowledge of God is the indispensable prerequisite.

Such knowledge may be reliably and validly obtained by scientific substantiation of a dozen theological criteria. These can be inductively obtained from current knowledge, as it has been shown throughout this paper. The right perspective requires that Ultimate as well as Virtual Reality be independent of humankind, now or ever. The cosmocentric existence criteria are primary or sine qua non; they are omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, and omniefficience. The anthropocentric transcendence criteria are secondary or contingent; they are continuity, eternity, infinity, and perfection. Finally, the anthropomorphic relevance criteria are tertiary or optional; and they are wisdom, morality, providence, and personality. The key, of course, is critical thinking all along the line; to be suspicious of man-made aspects and features.

Next, evolutionary continua were examined and rolled up between Big Bangs and Big Crunches, generally within the framework of the standard oscillating cosmology. Negative and positive feedback mechanisms explain short-term adjustments as well as long-term adaptations, in dynamic fashion while maintaining apparent stability. General Systems Theory and nonequilibrium thermodynamics have shown that functional optimization and efficient energy transformation account for most natural phenomena and human behavioral patterns. Religion is a normal byproduct of cultural evolution, because unexplained reality provokes incapacitating anxieties to the detriment of survival. Religion itself has evolved from primitive to sophisticated, but first philosophy, later science have rendered its world-view obsolete. It is still around by zero-order beliefs and inertia. Regrettably, blind faith leads to fanaticism, dogmatism, and self-righteousness; the result being but so much blood, sweat, and tears- throughout History.

The limits of the Universe were considered next, as per current scientific knowledge. Cosmology, Relativity Theory, and Quantum Realism make up virtual reality between 0 degrees Kelvin and the speed of light on the one hand, and Big Bangs-Big Crunches on the other. However, were the Universe completely self-contained and self-sufficient, many phenomena would remain unexplained.

Going beyond the limits and reaching Ultimate Reality is possible. In fact, transcendental logic, mathematics, physics, and psychology can all converge in the limiting region of the Absolute; and help to establish the cosmic legislative authority of God. By transcending classical logic, we may build single-valued absolute logic that can only be true. Such logic, with complex inequalities, abstract algebraic structures, and associated vector spaces in semi-topogeneous orders allow transcendental mathematics, by means of which a potentially verifiable, hence empirical, model of the Absolute may be formulated. The model may be tested and validated by means of standard scientific methodology. Transcendental physics considerations have shown that the Absolute may very well be a perfectly homogeneous and isotropic and nonmaterial substance that would fulfill all the existence, transcendence, and relevance criteria required of God, as mentioned earlier. Thereafter, the absolute legislative authority of God becomes intuitively evident. Transcendental psychology considerations enable us to see that our ethics and modus vivendi should be geared to cosmic morality based on the modus operandi of the Absolute.

Once we realize who, what, and why we are, in an absolutely trustworthy and indisputable sense, we must sober up from our myopic selfishness and evil. Again, we are for the perfection of the Absolute, wherein lies our cosmic dignity as well as responsibility. The only future compatible with this perspective is knowledge and love in peaceful harmony and childlike innocence.

It may be said in conclusion, that this informal paper has perhaps succeeded in showing that there may be a little light at the end of the tunnel, after all. Thousands of years of erroneous or aimless groping in the dark may have brought us to the abyss of bestiality and the absurdity of Evil; but not without some hope to avoid global catastrophe and possible self-annihilation via ethical maturity. While we grow out of suicidal adolescence, we need trustworthy ethical leadership. Moral guidance must be absolutely credible, thus God's absolute authority ought to be reauthenticated. Only Science can do that. How? This paper has shown a tentative blueprint in the sense of a modest pilot study.

The price of generality is meager content, for which apologies are in order. More optimistically, great oaks may grow out of modest acorns, iff they are the right acorns. The best view of the oak forest is from the nearest mountain ridge. Lofty contemplation has led to juggling tricks. Perhaps this paper has merely pulled lively rabbits out of an old hat. However, if these rabbits provoke new interest and lots of research; then they will have been worth pulling out of even the dustiest and shabbiest hat. Of course, first we need to roast and chew these lean rabbits, so that we won't choke on them. Please, pardon the shallowness of the rabbit dish. Thank you for your attention.

Frank A. Luger, Budapest, April 9, 1999