Naturalism and Metaphysics

(Today’s article is by guest writer Josh Fink. For a brief bio, see below.)

Materialism isn’t the only game in town.

Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with modeling what reality fundamentally is. Despite the occasional disdain our culture can take toward the field, it’s important to note that we’re each walking around with some model of reality, whether examined or not. For the majority of us, this usually defaults to the popular physicalist assumption that the universe is composed of matter. It’s not hard to see why: upon inspection, this sure seems to be the case! With each advancement in measuring equipment, we seem to find more and smaller particles, eventually discovering quantum field theory which we’re now trying to square with the Newtonian macrophysics we observe at the human level of reality.

As a “daily driver” metaphysics, materialism seems to work just fine. It’s not until we start trying to model subjective experience that it begins to show a gap in explanatory power. Science has yet to describe a mechanism by which neuron firings in the brain can “produce” inner experience. This is commonly referred to as the “hard problem” of consciousness; how do we go from quantitative physical states (380-500 nanometer light) to qualitative experience (the color blue)? We can describe elevations of oxytocin, but not the feeling of love.

Part of the gap here is that science can explain how a thing behaves, but not what it is fundamentally. It’s all well and good to say that matter is composed of atoms, and atoms of subatomic matter, down the nested chain of turtles to ontological bedrock. We will always arrive at some irreducible concept (called a reduction base in philosophical parlance) in terms of which everything else must be described. Physicalist theory chooses matter as its reduction base. 

Materialism’s inability to account for subjectivity can lead us to consider another possibility: what if subjectivity itself is primary? Reality seems to be made of matter upon inspection, but inspection must occur for this to be the case. In this view, experience is the sole natural given. We don’t interact with matter as such, but rather with a mental representation of it. We can never know definitively what reality is, only how it appears to awareness. This is the main idea of idealist philosophy, which posits mind as ontologically primary to matter.

As spiritual practitioners, we’re undoubtedly familiar with phenomena not easily explained by the scientific method. We’re concerned with the meaning of human life, and may engage with concepts like synchronicity or nonduality. Under a materialist metaphysics, it can be difficult to acknowledge the reality of these experiences without large gaps in our mental models (or worse, further appeals to that much-abused word: “quantum”). In a mind-first ontology, these phenomena are not only allowed, they’re almost expected. Naturalism remains intact, and we’re able to discuss ideas like universal mind and consciousness without becoming unscientific in our explorations. 

Being able to work in a mind-first ontology can provide a number of benefits to a spiritual naturalist. The most immediate of these is a validation of inner experience, not as a byproduct of circumstance, but as one’s primary existence. This can aid in meditative and therapeutic practices as we learn to recognize and work with inner states in a validating, embodied way.

One of the greatest benefits of this shift for me has been a recontextualization of wisdom traditions such as Vedanta, depth psychology, and the words of Christ and Buddha. Idealist thinking offers a map of reality whereby a point of subjective awareness arises within a field of objective mentation, which appears as matter to the Subject. The Subject is at the center of this field, consistent with relativity theory. Subject and Object arise mutually through the act of observation, which mirrors the Vedantic concept of Atman/Brahman. Thus, idealism can provide a philosophical container for challenging spiritual concepts.

All of this is not to say that idealism is definitely true, or materialism definitely false. Alternative models of reality allow for different avenues of exploration and new ways of understanding meditative or spiritual practice. The ability to switch between models has been of great aid to me on my path, whereby I’ve learned not to try to be “right”, but rather hope to be “less wrong”.

__________
Learn about Membership in the Spiritual Naturalist Society

The Spiritual Naturalist Society works to spread awareness of spiritual naturalism as a way of life, develop its thought and practice, and help bring together like-minded practitioners in fellowship.

SNS strives to include diverse voices within the spectrum of naturalistic spirituality. Authors will vary in their opinions, terms, and outlook. The views of no single author therefore necessarily reflect those of all Spiritual Naturalists or of SNS.
___________