Changes

Recall that the first rule of formulating a good scientific hypothesis is to start with the most elegantly simple explanation, not the more complex. In this case the simple explanation is that '''there are not two but three building blocks, matter, energy, and consciousness, and all three are interchangeable, co-equal, eternal, neither created nor destroyed'''.  From the standpoint of simple observation we routinely see that when matter/energy becomes assembled in more complex ways, it becomes increasingly conscious.  Is not consciousness therefore the third partner of matter/energy, the underlying impulse that drives matter to self-assemble into complex forms in the first place?  This makes consciousness not a product, but a progenitor of physics.  If so, then it logically follows that there is a larger Consciousness (capital C) underlying what we know and experience as our individual consciousness.  Indeed it could be said that we are only conscious as individuals because  we participate in this larger (universal) Consciousness.  This touches on the core idea of so many forms of mysticism, which is that the universe itself is enchanted and alive, not mindless and dead. To hold this viewpoint is the first step on the path to religiousness.  Beyond that first step, of course, religion branches out in many directions.  Some will heavily personify Consciousness in the form of one or more transcendent deities.  Others will understand Consciousness to be thoroughly embedded within nature.  At this point we have no concern with those or other branches of developed religion.  Our inquiry is concerned only with the possibility of a common starting point to religious thought and feeling.

Recall that the first rule of formulating a good scientific hypothesis is to start with the most elegantly simple explanation, not the more complex. In this case the simple explanation is that '''there are not two but three building blocks, matter, energy, and consciousness, and all three are interchangeable, co-equal, eternal, neither created nor destroyed'''.  From the standpoint of simple observation we routinely see that when matter/energy becomes assembled in more complex ways, it becomes increasingly conscious.  Is not consciousness therefore the third partner of matter/energy, the underlying impulse that drives matter to self-assemble into complex forms in the first place?  This makes consciousness not a product, but a progenitor of physics.  If so, then it logically follows that there is a larger Consciousness (capital C) underlying what we know and experience as our individual consciousness.  Indeed it could be said that we are only conscious as individuals because  we participate in this larger (universal) Consciousness.  This touches on the core idea of so many forms of mysticism, which is that the universe itself is enchanted and alive, not mindless and dead. To hold this viewpoint is the first step on the path to religiousness.  Beyond that first step, of course, religion branches out in many directions.  Some will heavily personify Consciousness in the form of one or more transcendent deities.  Others will understand Consciousness to be thoroughly embedded within nature.  At this point we have no concern with those or other branches of developed religion.  Our inquiry is concerned only with the possibility of a common starting point to religious thought and feeling.

In terms of that starting point I propose that the definitive difference between the religious person and the non-religious person is that '''the non-religious person believes in the Two Things''' (matter, energy) '''and the religious person believes in the Three Things''' (matter, energy, consciousness).  Religion builds on the intuitive certainty that consciousness is not a mere mechanical product of matter/energy.  Consciousness therefore must transcend, be equal to, or be embedded within matter and energy.  Even primitive people lacking the modern concept of matter/energy could certainty note that consciousness as experienced from within is qualitatively different from the routine mechanics otherwise observed in nature.  With us they no doubt shared the feeling of not being responsible for one's own consciousness, and from there it is a simple step to externalize, project, and name the result "God."  It is true in a sense that man always produces God, but that must be qualified by pointing out that this production is not only inevitable, but in fact impossible if God--or Universal Consciousness--did not actually exist.  Thus in their awe for the living quality of the universe, as initially experienced within themselves, men proceeded to create an extensive anthology of legends and myths in response. Without even knowing the number or names of the Three Things they believed in, they fleshed them out in story. Christian myth comes breathtakingly close with its Holy Trinity of Father (energy), Son (matter), and Holy Spirit (consciousness). Myth has many names for God, but clearly they all refer to the unknown power that urges matter toward ever more complex forms, animates nature with consciousness, and even makes the ascent toward love possible.

In terms of that starting point I propose that the definitive difference between the religious person and the non-religious person is that '''the non-religious person believes in the Two Things''' (matter, energy) '''and the religious person believes in the Three Things''' (matter, energy, consciousness).  Religion builds on the intuitive certainty that consciousness is not a mere mechanical product of matter/energy.  Consciousness therefore must transcend, be equal to, or be embedded within matter and energy.  Even primitive people lacking the modern concept of matter/energy could certainty note that consciousness as experienced phenomenologically is qualitatively different from the routine mechanics otherwise observed in nature.  With us they no doubt shared the feeling of not being responsible for one's own consciousness, and from there it is a simple step to externalize, project, and name the result "God."  It is true in a sense that man always produces God, but that must be qualified by pointing out that this production is not only inevitable, but in fact impossible if God--or Universal Consciousness--did not actually exist.  Thus in their awe for the living quality of the universe, as initially experienced within themselves, men proceeded to create an extensive anthology of legends and myths in response. Without even knowing the number or names of the Three Things they believed in, they fleshed them out in story. Christian myth comes breathtakingly close with its Holy Trinity of Father (energy), Son (matter), and Holy Spirit (consciousness). Myth has many names for God, but clearly they all refer to the unknown power that urges matter toward ever more complex forms, animates nature with consciousness, and even makes the ascent toward love possible.

----

----