Do our lives have meaning? You bet they do! But what is that meaning, and from where does it come? < Back Eternity vs. Immortality David Cowles May 29, 2022 Do our lives have meaning? You bet they do! But what is that meaning, and from where does it come? Nowadays, most folks will tell you that they don’t believe in ‘life after death’...and that’s a good thing because the phrase itself is an oxymoron. Death is defined as the absence of life. So, if there is ‘life after death,’ then either that ‘life’ is unreal (think zombies, kids) or that ‘death’ is (think ghosts). Either way, ‘life after death’ makes no sense. Nowadays, most folks will tell you they believe something like this, “You live your life, then you die, and that’s all there is to it!” Funny though, it doesn’t always seem as though they believe the ‘that’s all there is to it’ part. Of course, it’s perfectly possible to believe ‘that’s all there is to it.’ Shortly, we’ll see that Nietzsche and Wittgenstein believed exactly that; but judged by their actions, not everyone who says it, believes it. In fact, it’s become fashionable for folks to say, “…And that’s all there is to it,” just before they tell you what it is they really believe: “Whatever happens, it happens according to God’s plan.” “Whatever happens, it is the will of God.” “Whatever happens, happens for a reason.” “I know that Grandma (deceased) is really proud of you.” “I want to leave the world a better place than I found it.” “I do believe in reincarnation, of course.” “My name is Ozymandias, king of kings; look upon my works ye mighty and despair.” – P.B. Shelley Where’s Waldo? Can you spot the hidden appeal to transcendence in each of these seemingly innocuous taglines? When most folks, certainly not all folks, but most, say “…and that’s all there is to it,” they mean anything but that. The taglines quoted above, for example, have two things in common: Each of these tags introduces an element of transcendence (ontological hierarchy) into what was pre-defined as a totally ‘immanent,’ perfectly ‘flat,’ ontologically ‘democratic’ universe. Each of these tags suggests that we somehow continue to participate in the temporal world even after our death…or at least we imagine we do. So, what gives? Ever since 1700 (the early days of the so-called ‘Enlightenment’) any serious discussion of God has been verboten in most intellectual circles. Nevertheless, we instinctively sense that there is something that transcends our daily lives and gives them meaning, and we want to find a way to express that intuition without attracting the attention of our new, secular Inquisitors. And make no mistake about it: the Inquisition is alive and well among today’s cultural and intellectual elites. In the 1950’s Bishop Fulton Sheen had a popular TV show, Life is Worth Living, but unless our lives have meaning, it is hard to see what would make them worth living. Do the pleasures of flesh outweigh the inevitable suffering that follows? Knowing what we know now, in the absence of ‘meaning,’ would we choose to be born? People who say that life is its own reward, that life gives itself all the meaning it needs, are usually people basking in the glow of youth, good health, and economic sufficiency. ‘Take a message to Michael:’ people who are young, healthy, and prosperous become people who are old, infirm, and financially insecure. Ecstasy is agony’s foreplay. On the other hand, people are remarkably willing to endure serious pain if it can lead to a meaningful end. For example: A woman in labor hopes to give birth. A martyr hopes to see God. A patriot endures torture out of loyalty to his country. A ‘lover’ chooses to ‘lay down his life for a friend.’ Now imagine these same sufferings if they were entirely gratuitous, if there was never any hope for a meaningful outcome! The author of the Book of Ecclesiastes describes life without meaning as “vanity and a chase after wind” and adds, “Therefore, I detested life…” Consider, too, these words of despair from Job: “Let the day disappear, the day I was born…Let darkness, dead darkness, expunge it.” Job does not pray for a quick end; he prays never to have been born at all! Nowadays, many folks decide that life is neither meaningful nor inherently rewarding. They decide that it is not “worth living” after all and so they choose to end their lives voluntarily, and often violently. Nothing can give itself meaning. The ‘meaning of an entity,’ by definition, must refer to something that transcends that entity. If our lives do have meaning, that meaning must come from something outside those lives themselves. That’s what ‘meaning’ means! The meaning of an event cannot be found in the event itself; if it could, it would be the event itself, not the meaning of the event. We might imagine that our lives derive meaning from the ‘works’ we leave behind (Ozymandias), from our descendants (Abraham, David), from our service to God (St. Paul), from the impact we have on the lives of others (Mother Theresa), etc. For the most part, our homespun notions of transcendence embody the idea that we somehow continue to have a ‘stake’ in temporal events, even after death. What will happen after our deaths is often critically important to us while we are living. But why? According to the ‘secular’ models, we will no longer exist in any form, so why do we behave as if we had some stake in the future? According to some secular models, seemingly in answer to Job’s prayers, the lives we’ve lived don’t just end, they are ‘expunged’ (retroactively), ‘at the hour of our death’ (particular judgment) and at the end of time (general judgment), i.e., ‘when Hell freezes over,’ quite literally. As the universe hurtles toward its frigid fate, it appears that Job’s ‘prayer of annihilation’ has been answered. (Note: in The Riddle of Job, another essay in this issue of AT Magazine, we find that Job ultimately finds purpose and overcomes despair...but that’s outside the scope of this article.) We’ve gotten ahead of ourselves. Many of us apparently believe (though most of us would not admit it) that those who die somehow ‘retain a stake’ in the spatiotemporal world; they continue to participate, actively or passively, as actors or observers, directly or vicariously, consciously or otherwise. Ozymandias, for instance, imagined that he would participate directly, albeit unconsciously, in the future. His physical and social legacy was meant to influence people and events for all time. (But note, “nothing beside remains.”) This sort of transcendence is what we mean when we talk about ‘immortality.’ Obviously, however, no one is immortal (i.e., infinitely extended in spacetime). So, do our lives really matter after all? If the universe was expected to last forever, and if we had introduced a novel and beneficial pattern into that universe, and if that pattern was conserved and guaranteed to impact future events, then sure, we might be justified in saying that our lives had meaning. But this ontological utopia bears no resemblance whatsoever to the world we actually live in! According to 20th century cosmology, the spatiotemporal universe, its information, energy, and matter, will all disappear in the ‘Big Freeze’ (the opposite of the ‘Big Bang’). And Hawking Radiation won’t save us this time because there is no longer a ‘universe’ to conserve it. Ozymandias’ legacy boiled down to certain ordered patterns, physical and social. We now know that all order decays over time (entropy). At some future date, the universe will reach (or infinitely approach) a state of maximal entropy (zero order). Time will no longer exist, and no trace of any past ordered state will survive. Simply put, whatever novel and beneficial patterns were introduced into the universe along the way will be irrevocably lost. In the words of Job, they will be ‘expunged.’ Cosmology has made Ozymandias of us all. Think of the world as a giant computer simulation (The Matrix?). At the end of time, all possible sequences of events converge at the same null point. Hugh Everett’s ‘many words’ (quantum mechanics) ultimately become one world; Robert Frost’s ‘two roads’ end at one and the same destination. Patterns quickly become distorted; sometimes they turn inside out and become their own opposites (inversion); other times they cancel each other out (interference). So, if you are indeed searching to give your life ‘meaning,’ all forms of ‘immortality’ inevitably come to the same dead end. Immortality is a bridge to nowhere. Is there any other scenario that could give our lives meaning? Fortunately, the answer is, resoundingly, “Yes!” Folks regularly confuse and conflate the notions of ‘immortality’ and ‘eternity.’ Immorality denotes unlimited physical extension in infinite spacetime. Not happening! Eternity, on the other hand, denotes existence entirely outside of spacetime. Compare the infinite time of Immortality with the timelessness of Eternity – all time vs. no time – the two concepts couldn’t be much farther apart. They almost qualify as antonyms; and yet, we confuse them! We have seen that the idea of Immortality is a non-starter; shouldn’t the same be true of Eternity? Far from it! A grandchild, age five at the time, once explained it to me this way: “Santa Claus is in the numbers, but God is outside the numbers.” Bingo! (Yes, I have very precocious grandchildren.) Talk about putting the City of God (Augustine) on a bumper sticker! When you experience something, you don’t experience it in the present. That experience is the Present. In fact, experience is what Presence is, per se. Outside of ‘experience,’ there is no present, only past and future, but within experience, there is no past or future, only Presence. Experiences precede and succeed one another along the past/future timeline. However, there is no such sequencing of events ‘within’ an experience (‘the eternal Now’). One ‘event’ = one quantum of experience (William James called these quanta “buds”), and all experience takes place outside of time. Without the phenomenon of experience, every event would lie in either the past or the future of a given infinitesimal ‘point’ on the timeline. There would be no Present. We know that there is no such a thing as Presence, and therefore no such thing as Experience, on the timeline. Yet we also know that there is in fact such a thing as Experience, and therefore Presence: Cogito ergo est! In fact, everything that exists, exists in the present. Nothing exists in either the past or in the future per se. Events in the past or future may be said to ‘exist’ only insofar as they are felt in the Present, through the medium of the Experience. So, without experience, nothing actual exists. Therefore, Being is Experience. In the words of Parmenides, often called the father of Western philosophy, “what is given for being is also given for thinking,” - i.e., for experiencing. We tend to confine the phenomenon of ‘experience’ to human beings (or all higher forms of animal life). That is not the way we’re using the term here. Every event is an ‘experience.’ Per William James, every event is a ‘bud.’ Per Parmenides, Being and Experiencing are one! Often unconsciously, every event experiences its own unique ‘actual world,’ the world out of which it is emerging. In fact, it is that experience that transforms the undifferentiated spatiotemporal background (a mere multiplicity) into a relevant actual world (a nexus). Likewise, every event experiences itself in the process of emerging; and finally, every event experiences itself experiencing itself in the process of emerging, so: I experience. I experience myself experiencing. I experience myself experiencing myself experiencing. This ‘hierarchy of experience’ adds a dimension of depth to our experience of the world. Physicist Richard Feynman showed that there is no linear time within quantum events. As in the drawings of M.C. Escher, when you trace quantum level events (‘Feynman Diagrams’), you find there’s no beginning, middle or end. That’s Presence, that’s Eternity - the annihilation of past and future! Events are embedded in other events. In fact, it is a defining characteristic of an ‘event’ that it must be embedded in other events and that other events be embedded in it. The universal phenomenon of embeddedness ensures that every event is unique. No event can have the same embedded structure as any other event. This is another defining characteristic of ontogenesis. Is ‘time’ then just another word for ‘embeddedness?’ Is embeddedness the deep source of what we call ‘spacetime?’ Does ‘Beta is embedded in Gamma’ mean that Beta occurs before Gamma and that Gamma occurs after Beta? From this, can we infer that there must exist a single uber-event, call it Omega, in which all other events are embedded and another uber-event, call it Alpha, the source of all value, that is embedded in every other event. And now here’s the key: drum roll please, Alpha and Omega are one and the same event! They are two different aspects of a single uber-event. In such an uber-event, time dissolves. That’s what we call ‘Eternity.’ As we’ve just seen, it is a defining characteristic of an event that it be embedded in other events and that other events be embedded in it. How does the uber-event meet this test? Like all events, the uber-event is internally timeless. The experience of that timelessness is the experience of Eternity. From its own limited perspective, every event is the ‘local Present;’ therefore, from its universal perspective, the uber-event must be the ‘eternal (universal) Present.’ We grasp intuitively how all local events can be embedded in the uber-event, but how is the uber-event embedded in other events, i.e., embedded in the very same events that are embedded in it? First, the uber-event judges every actual world (what is) according to the values that the uber-event embodies. Second, the values that the uber-event embodies are the values that incent novel events to emerge. Third, the uber-event is the event by which all other events are measured and judged. Fourth, meaningful participation in the uber-event is the goal of every event: i.e., Eternal Life. So, do our lives have meaning? You bet they do! They acquire meaning from the values that motivate them and from the uber-event in which they will ultimately be embedded, eternally! David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com. Share Previous Next Do you like what you just read? Subscribe today and receive sneak previews of Aletheia Today Magazine articles before they're published. Plus, you'll receive our quick-read, biweekly blog, Thoughts While Shaving. Subscribe Thanks for subscribing! Click here. Return to Table of Contents, Winter 2023 Issue Return to Table of Contents, Holiday Issue Return to Table of Contents, Halloween Issue Return to Table of Contents, September Issue Return to Table of Contents, Beach Issue Return to Table of Contents, June Issue

< Back My MD Should Be a Bot David Cowles Jul 10, 2025 “AI is 4 times better at diagnosing complex medical conditions than MDs. This…could be the death knell for the traditional practice of medicine.” In an earlier post on this site, My PCP Should be a Bot , we argued that AI could take over many of the mundane tasks associated with Primary Care and assist physicians with their other, higher level functions. It is clear now that we undershot the mark…by a wide margin. Yes, AI has a place in Primary Care, but it has a much larger role to play in Specialty Care, especially in advanced diagnostics. Microsoft reports that AI consumer products like Bing and Copilot see over 50 million health-related inquiries every day. Search engines and AI companions are quickly becoming the new front line in healthcare. But this is only scratching the surface of what’s possible. AI can do more, much more; it can be transformational. Along with CRISPR and Bespoke Medicine (N = 1), AI can be part of a huge advance in population health. Toward the end of 2024, Microsoft launched a dedicated consumer health effort, led by clinicians, designers, engineers, and AI scientists. But for AI to make a real difference, clinicians and patients alike must be able to trust its performance. No surprise here. New technologies always entail an adoption curve. Is it safe to drive one of them newfangled horseless carriages? Or fly in one those aero planes? (I mean, if God wanted us to fly, wouldn’t he have given us wings?) But 100 years later, we have Carvana and Travelocity. To practice medicine in the United States, physicians need to pass the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), a rigorous and standardized assessment of clinical knowledge and decision making. USMLE questions were among the earliest benchmarks used to evaluate AI’s competence. Not surprisingly, generative AI has now advanced to the point of scoring near-perfect scores on the USMLE and similar exams. But these tests primarily rely on multiple-choice questions, which favor memorization over deep understanding. By reducing medicine to one-shot answers on multiple-choice questions, such benchmarks undoubtedly overstate the apparent competence of AI systems and obscure their limitations. No one’s going to trust a Bot to manage a loved one’s healthcare purely because it performed well on some standardized test. Algorithmic medicine might rely on discrete answers to specific questions but ars medica , the art of medicine, requires clinical reasoning capability. How does it perform on ‘sequential diagnosis’, a cornerstone of real-world medical decision making.  In this process, a clinician begins with an initial patient presentation and then iteratively selects questions and diagnostic tests to arrive at a final diagnosis. For example, a patient presenting with cough and fever may lead the clinician to order and review blood tests and a chest X-ray before they feel confident enough to diagnose pneumonia. Each week, the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) – one of the world’s leading medical journals – publishes a Case Record of the Massachusetts General Hospital, presenting a patient’s care journey in a detailed, narrative format. These cases are among the most diagnostically complex and intellectually demanding in clinical medicine, often requiring multiple specialists and diagnostic tests to reach a definitive diagnosis. How does AI perform in this arena? Surely here we need the empathy and imagination of a well-trained and highly experienced human agent. To answer these questions, Microsoft created a series of interactive diagnostic challenges based on 304 recent NEJM case studies. Clinicians, be they AI Bots or human physicians, were able to ask iterative questions and order appropriate tests. As information became available, the clinicians could update their reasoning, gradually leading to a final diagnosis. This diagnosis can then be compared to the gold-standard outcome published in the NEJM. Each requested investigation also incurs a (virtual) cost, reflecting real-world healthcare expenditures so we can evaluate performance across two key dimensions: diagnostic accuracy and resource expenditure.  The Microsoft AI Diagnostic Orchestrator (MAI-DxO) is a system designed to emulate a virtual panel of physicians with diverse diagnostic approaches collaborating to solve cases.  Orchestrator can integrate diverse data sources. It can turn any LLM into a ‘panel’ of virtual clinicians that can ask follow-up questions, order tests, deliver a diagnosis, and then run a cost check before deciding to proceed.  MAI-DxO paired with OpenAI’s o3 correctly solved 85.5% of the NEJM benchmark cases. Pretty good! But how does this compare with the recommendations of real life, flesh and blood specialists? For comparison, Microsoft created a panel of 21 practicing physicians from the US and UK, each with 5-20 years of clinical experience. On the same tasks, these experts achieved a mean accuracy of…wait for it…just 20%. Astonishing! AI is 4 times better at diagnosing complex medical conditions than MDs. This is a shot in the arm for AI assisted medicine but, more importantly and quite unexpectedly, this could be the death knell for the traditional practice of medicine. What are we missing? Is our AI system ordering every possible test – regardless of cost, patient discomfort, or delays in care? Nope! MAI-DxO is configured to operate within defined cost constraints. This allows for explicit exploration of the cost-value trade-offs inherent in diagnostic decision making. In fact, Microsoft found that MAI-DxO delivered both higher diagnostic accuracy and lower overall testing costs than physicians. Microsoft’s findings also suggest that AI reduces unnecessary healthcare costs – not so surprising given that 25% of U.S. healthcare spending is wasted on interventions that are inappropriate for the patient’s actual condition. So how can we account for this amazing result? On the plus side, no single physician, no team of physicians, can span the full complexity of the NEJM case series. There is always one more voice to be heard. AI, on the other hand, doesn’t face this limitation; it can blend breadth and depth of expertise. But the discrepancy is so glaring that we cannot escape the conjecture that something ‘not so good’ must be happening at the physicians’ end of the see-saw. Follow-up studies should focus on why flesh and blood ‘agents’ perform so poorly. Are they overworked? Are their information systems outdated? Do they have a harder time moving past their initial ‘blink’ diagnoses, even when evidence is pointing in another direction. Or are they limited by inappropriate sociological biases based on things like the patient’s gender, race, age, occupation, education level, income, or zip code? But there is an overwhelming sense that such follow-up studies, important though they are, will amount to just rearranging deck chairs on The Titanic . If Microsoft’s findings are confirmed, traditional medicine is dead…period. The big question now is how long it will take society ‘to stop life support and pronounce’. There is a meme of unknown origin that states that it was not until 1900 that medicine did more good than harm. The Microsoft study suggests that that assessment might be wildly overoptimistic. A better meme might be, “When will medicine finally begin to do more good than harm?” Will the healthcare profession hasten the achievement of that benchmark…or retard it?” Brutal…I know; but consider what’s at stake! Rembrandt. The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp. 1632, oil on canvas, 216.5 × 169.5 cm. Mauritshuis, The Hague. Baroque, Dutch Golden Age. Rembrandt’s The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp captures a pivotal moment in the history of medicine—when science, observation, and education began to challenge traditional, experience-based practice. In much the same way, today’s AI diagnostic systems, like Microsoft’s MAI-DxO, are disrupting the modern medical profession. The painting shows medicine as a spectacle of human intellect dissecting the unknown; now, AI replaces the demonstrator’s scalpel with data-driven precision, automating what was once a learned, manual, and interpretive act. The cadaver becomes a metaphor for how patient care risks being depersonalized in the era of algorithmic medicine. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Got Money? David Cowles May 20, 2026 “The main reason that people who don’t have money don’t have money is that they don’t have money.” Recently, I retired from a job that had occupied my attention for a mere 45 years. It was the worst of jobs, it was the best of jobs, but thank God, it paid well. I was able to provide my family with material advantages intended to make up for the lack of a fully engaged spouse or parent. Since I retired, I have made more money each year than I ever did working! It’s called investing. Now, of course, we happen to be living in a charmed era, investment-wise. You’d have to be a pretty poor money manager not to have made gains over the last 10 years. However, I now suffer from the conviction, possibly delusional, that I could have made money in less advantageous periods as well. There’s precedent. In early 1970’s Boston, two friends of mine purchased a six family residential structure now valued at $6,000,000. Cost: $10,000. I myself had an opportunity to buy a popular neighborhood bar…for $10,000. Or I could have bought a working farm in Maritime Canada…again, $10,000. It gets worse. In both ventures I would have had partners so I would not have needed the full 10k…but I did need a seemingly unattainable 1k just to be included in the conversation. No joy! In those days, George McGovern was running for President on a platform that included a $1,000 minimum annual income for all Americans. No need to ask what I was doing on election day! Like Jacob in the Old Testament, I had to work - in his case for 14 years, in my case for 45 years - just to create the capital we lacked at the beginning of our careers. Did someone say ‘Wage Slaves’? Both Jacob and I (several orders of magnitude below) went on to live economically comfortable lives. But at what cost? Arguably, I worked 45 years to get to where I could have been Day One if I’d had $10,000 in my sock drawer. (Burglars take note, I will be moving my money later today.) In every economic epoch, the generation of wealth relies on the same three sources: Inspiration (innovation, imagination, ingenuity), Perspiration (labor), and Capital (money, land). Inspiration derives its economic value from its future utility, Perspiration from our present exertions, Capital from wealth created in the past, conserved, and now unlocked. In every era, all three sources necessarily contribute to the generation of wealth, but in proportions that vary depending on the means of production characteristic of the epoch. Likewise, all three sources share in the fruits of economic activity but not necessarily in proportion to their actual contributions. The relationship between contributions made and rewards received is called Political Economy . The disparity between the two is called Alienation . Examples : Much of the wealth generated in the ante-bellum American South was attributable to Labor (slavery) but that wealth was routed primarily to the holders of Capital (plantation owners). The Industrial Revolution substituted the factory (wage slavery) for the plantation. Marxists proposed to invert the distribution of rewards between capital and labor. Fatally, they failed to acknowledge the crucial role played by Inspiration and so failed to reward those contributors appropriately. Hyper-materialism turned out to be Marx’s Achilles Heal. Happily, the Industrial Revolution is behind us… along with the Enlightenment philosophy that grounded it. We are now in the third stage of the Cyber Revolution: (1) Computerization (PC and the smart phone). (2) Socialization (internet, the web, and social media). (3) Artificial Intelligence (the democratization of information and agency). The Cyber Age age puts a premium on Innovation and rewards it accordingly. Capital remains essential to meet infrastructure demands so stock market returns are healthy. The odd person out, as usual, is Labor. In a world where much of what we have traditionally thought of as work can be automated with gains in both quality and efficiency, grunt work has become the least important leg of the economic tripod. We’ve come a long way from Tara and the assembly line. We are truly in the process of turning the economic paradigm on its head. For millennia Labor has been over-exploited and under-rewarded. Now that must change! As Labor becomes less essential, and solidarity more so, compensation must exceed contribution. At least since the Middle Ages, Labor has played a disproportionately important role in wealth creation – a role that has been systematically under-rewarded. In order to sustain productivity, it was necessary to embed non-economic, quasi-economic, and meta-economic memes into our culture; for example: He (sic) who works, eats. Work earns respect; idleness…contempt. We have a moral obligation to contribute to the commonweal. Work provides an opportunity for us to express our creativity. Work ennobles the spirit. The Intellectual History of the late 19 th century can be understood as a contest between Marx and his foil, Pope Leo XIII. Interestingly, both agreed on the primacy of human labor on the spectrum of social goods. We can no longer afford such ideological illusions. Yes, ‘work’ will continue to be a necessary part of life for the foreseeable future…but not 100,000 hours of work in a lifetime. Technology allows us to leverage our efforts to generate much greater productivity in many fewer hours. The character of work will need to change; emphasis must now be on the 3 C’s: Creativity, Craft, and Care. We’ll need to find new ways to distribute societal wealth, ways that are not hog-tied to Labor. At this early stage, it would be a mistake to hyperfocus on any single solution. We are in the ‘let a thousand flowers bloom’ stage; but several ideas have already surfaced: A 30 hour work week (40 hours pay) Sabbatical years (at full salary) A minimum annual income, not tied to Labor, for all legal residents These are worth exploring. But we should also be considering a more fundamental reorientation; for example: (1) A national bank created specifically to provide no interest, low verification, micro capital investments to budding entrepreneurs, perhaps piggy-backing on the current student loan infrastructure or using blockchain to create a secure, anonymized, decentralized application and distribution network. If I can borrow public money to pay for college, why not for alternative skills training or to finance my own start-up? The main reason that people who don’t have money don’t have money is that they don’t have money. We can fix that! (2) A sovereign wealth fund that invests in bleeding edge technology and vests every legal resident with an equal share over time. This fund would supplement existing public and private retirement plans (e.g. social security, pensions) but without any tie to employment. (3) A pre-K through 12 educational system, finally liberated from the need to train children to be ‘productive’ members of the workforce, now dedicated to stimulating curiosity, promoting creativity, and empowering problem solving. I envision a blizzard of public and private school alternatives offering a variety of foci, loci, teaching styles, even languages of instruction. When it comes to curriculum, N=1. (4) A pervasive recognition that we prosper not at the expense of our neighbor (class war), but in solidarity (community). The grandfather of Western Philosophy, Anaximander Hot Link (6 th century BCE), taught that ‘actual entities’ come to be when 2 or more ‘potential entities’, freely and without expectation of reciprocation, grant each other ‘reck’ ( chreon ), i.e. ‘what’s due them’ or ‘what they need’, e.g. respect, the space to become all that they can be, agape (love), shalom (peace). They template one another and the potential becomes actual in the process. I am (self) only because ‘you’ (other) are! I am in the context of you, the ‘other’. This concept resurfaces in the New Testament, primarily in the writings of Paul and John, as koinonia (communion). The 1 st Letter of John is particularly explicit: “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have koinonia (communion, fellowship) with one another…” (1: 7) Again ‘light’ suggests reflection: if we walk together in the same light, we reflect one another, we template. In this way the early Christian church recaptured the primacy of mutuality that inspired Western philosophy prior to the Platonic catastrophe. Fast forward another 1500+ years and we rediscover the ontology of mutuality in Hasidic Judaism and later still in the 20 th century existentialism of Martin Buber. The emphasis on mutuality in the ontologies of Anaximander, Jesus, the Baal Shem Tov and Buber ran counter to the cultural norms of their day: slavery, imperialism, serfdom, laissez-faire capitalism, nationalism, and even fascism. Regardless, mutuality remained a moral imperative for those who recognized it. But ‘the times that are a-changing’ (Dylan): figuratively speaking at least, we are at ‘the dawning of the Age of Aquarius ’ ( Hair ). It is not for nothing that Pisces , the fish, is an important symbol in the New Testament. Fish represent wealth and the abundance of nature, but abundance that can often be unlocked only at the expense of backbreaking, alienated, labor. How naïve am I to suggest that we may finally be entering an era when ethics and economics harmonize! And yet… Mutuality, the key to the Good Life, indeed the key to life itself, promises to unlock prosperity for the entire planet, if only our ancient idolatries (race, class, caste, etc.) don’t get in the way. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Archimedes and Christianity David Cowles Aug 26, 2025 “Science is not the antithesis of Christianity; it is a subset of it… not the enemy of religion but its most powerful engine.” Don’t blame Archimedes (b. 280 BCE); he got a bum rap. He did not invent the Archimedean Property nor did he lend it his name. That came much later when someone noticed that Archimedes’ work entailed certain previously unidentified assumptions about the structure of the phenomenal world. The Archimedean Property (AP) boils down to the assumption that real phenomena can be exclusively and exhaustively modeled within the domain of Real Numbers (extended to include Complex Numbers). Certainly sounds reasonable and it is…for most purposes. Sure, it fails to capture certain features of the deep structure of the Real World but how often does that come up in polite conversation? You can live your life from birth through NLE and never give a thought to anything beyond Real Numbers…and in fact that’s exactly how people lived from the time of Plato until the 18 th century. We most often discuss AP in the context of Geometry (and Topology). The Euclidean Geometry we learned as adolescents assumes AP. So do most non-Euclidean Geometries (e.g. geometries applicable to curved spaces). However, there is a class of esoteric geometries that reject the Archimedean Property. They seek to model phenomena that can’t be adequately approximated using Real Numbers alone. These phenomena require the introduction of ‘Unreal’ Numbers such as infinities and infinitesimals and ‘p-adic’ numbers (loosely related to logarithms for the few of you out there who don’t have a PhD in Pure Mathematics, yet). Without AP, if any two entities intersect (tangent or overlap), one must be a subset of the other. Nothing touches, nothing overlaps, unless it absorbs totally or is totally absorbed. It’s a readymade plot twist for the next Sci-Fi Silver Screen blockbuster. It’ll be a remake of Goldfinger , which itself retells the legend of King Midas. I touch you, I absorb you…or you absorb me. This gives new meaning to ‘Kill or Be Killed!’ It is a game of tag…for adults, but a game with apocalyptic consequences. Not sure you want to go down this path? No problem: you can try it before you buy it. The game could be simulated on a computer; it could even anchor a whole new genre of computer games, competing with Fortnite , Grand Theft Auto , and Tour of Duty . Of course, such ‘individual imperialism’ is not the only possible response to life in a world without AP. For example, we might decide to live our lives in hermetically sealed pods. Or we might learn to live together, harmoniously and symbiotically, without invading each other’s personal space…what a concept! Or we could just go with the flow. I could welcome the other into myself and I could graciously reciprocate by freely allowing myself to be uploaded into ‘another other’. Again, feel free to try before you buy, but know this: the process may not be reversible…so your life literally depends on the result! ‘Another other’? Makes sense. A absorbs B, another, then AB is absorbed by C, another other, and so on ‘up the food chain’. But what if we turned Jacob’s Ladder into an Ouroboros? What if we allowed A to absorb B…and B to absorb A, simultaneously. What if we allowed our two sets to be subsets of themselves and of each other? Now that would be some cool place to live, agreed? Too much for you? Well, stay tuned! You are the product of a single fertilized sex cell. Today, your body consists of 30 trillion descendants of that cell, working more or less in harmony to ensure your (temporary) survival and to allow you to make all the contributions to human history your parents had planned for you. There will be no peace on earth or cure for cancer without you and there would be no you without the immediate and enduring cooperation of 30 trillion independent organisms (100 trillion over your entire lifetime). But there is something very special about these cells. Unlike simple life forms (e.g. bacteria), most of the cells in your body include a nucleus that houses copies of your primordial DNA. All animal and plant life consists primarily of nucleated cells. But while the first living organisms (prokaryotes) appeared on Earth 4 billion years ago, the first nucleated cells (eukaryotes) evolved just 2 billion years ago. More astounding, every eukaryotic cell on Earth today is likely descended from a single 2 billion year old ancestor. (By comparison, Abraham was a dilatant!) So how did the primal eukaryote evolve? Two unicellular life forms, bacteria perhaps, gave each other reck (Anaximander, Buber) and entered into a covenant (Jeremiah et al.). The process was described in 1986 by Nobel winning biologist, Paul Simon: “If you’ll be my bodyguard, I will be your long lost pal.” ( You can call me Al ) Perhaps Paul was drawing on an earlier description: “You will be my people, and I will be your God!” ( Jeremiah 7: 23). And so it happened! One cell agreed to give up its independence to become the nucleus of another cell in exchange for that cell’s protection (an early version of the feudal contract)…and together they conquered the Earth. Alexander, Augustus, eat your hearts out! We life forms are stubborn. It took 2 billion years for two of us to decide that cohabitation and cooperation might be better than conflict. And now we’re surprised that there’s no peace in the Middle East? It was a high stakes gamble, a giant leap of faith, but boy did it ever pay off! We are indebted to these two risk-taking pioneers for everything from the majestic Redwood Forests to the teeming Gulf Stream Waters, for Mother Theresa, and for you. ‘Thank you’ doesn’t cover it. There is a powerful Theory of Everything (TOE) that fundamentally depends on non-Archimedean topology. No, it’s not some esoteric version of String Theory: it does not require a cosmos with 10…or 26 dimensions. Nor is it obscure. In fact, every reader of this article is, happily or not, quite familiar with it. It’s called Christianity . Let’s just state it outright: Christian cosmology is fundamentally non-Archimedean! Write that 100 times on Sister Mary Martha’s blackboard. But don’t stop there! Christianity not only rejects AP; it also rejects the Transitive Property (if a > b and b > c then a > c) and the Fundamental Properties of Arithmetic (Commutative, Associative, and Distributive). Basically, Christianity repeals 5 years of primary school education. Or not! There is a real domain in which all these traditional properties hold but that ‘local’ domain is embedded in a much broader ‘universal’ domain where they do not. Arithmetic is a subset of mathematics. The Archimedean domain is a sub-region of the broader non-Archimedean Universe. Just as the Newtonian Universe is embedded in the Einsteinian Universe, so physics is embedded in theology . The defining doctrine of orthodox Christianity is Incarnation. The 2 nd person of the Blessed Trinity, the logos through whom ‘all things were made’ has in fact become one of those things . (John 1: 2 – 5) Contrary to the Foundation Axiom of Set Theory, the set is a subset of itself. God is the all-encompassing plenum and an irreducible quantum within that plenum . The Son of God is God. According to the Nicene Creed, Jesus Christ is ‘true God ( plenum ) and true man ( quantum )’. The whole is contained in one of its parts . Cosmos as Fun House! The reciprocal reflections in the Hall of Mirrors extend to infinity. The very concept of scale, so crucial to our understanding of the world, vanishes. The Cosmos is a fractal; no matter where you look it looks the same. It is a pattern endlessly embedded in itself. Embedded, not conflated! The part does not become the whole, nor the whole the part. Call it the Pauline Exclusion Principle . According to Incarnation’s companion doctrine of Trinity, the plenum and the quantum remain distinct personae of the one Godhead. Perhaps the best description of this relationship is provided by Paul in his First Letter to Corinthians : “When everything is subjected to him (Son), then the Son himself will be subjected to the one (Father) who subjected everything to him (Son) so that God may be all in all.” (15: 28) ‘All in all’, Anaxagoras’ pan in panti , describes the fundamental architecture of our non-Archimedean Universe. And it is also the Foundational Principal (Incarnation) of Christianity . It is no wonder that we are rapidly becoming unchurched. We have made a fetish of science. (Science is good but fetishizing anything is not.) Unfortunately, many Christians have responded to the fetish by rejecting the science. But science is not the antithesis of Christianity; it is a subset of it. Once we have overcome the notion that the Universe is Archimedean throughout and properly understood the place of cosmology within metaphysics, we will suddenly find that science is not the enemy of religion but its most powerful engine. Truly, this is the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius . “Come Holy Ghost!” *** Christ Pantocrator, 6th century, Saint Catherine’s Monastery, Sinai. The icon mirrors our theme by depicting Christ as both infinite plenum and finite quantum, true God and true man, embodying the non-Archimedean logic at the heart of Christianity. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Stations of the Cross David Cowles Mar 14, 2023 “The Stations of the Cross are not just about Jesus’ final hours; they are about all the hours of all of our lives.” When I was in grade school (parochial), there were no Fat Tuesdays to usher in the season of Lent – 40 dreary days leading up to Holy Week. Instead, we were subject to a ‘penitential practice’ perfectly commensurate with the event it presaged: crucifixion. No, not self-flagellation. Lord knows, we had parents enough for that. No, it was a Christian rite known as the Stations of the Cross. If the name sounds ominous, it was! Sometimes you can judge a book by its cover! Every Friday afternoon during Lent – Friday for heavens’ sake, ‘Freedom Day’ for the under 13 crowd – when the bell rang at 2:30, instead of rushing home and out to play, we were marched in silence to the near-by church to celebrate the stations. Some celebration! We sat in silence in a dimly lit church for what seemed like hours…but probably was less than 60 minutes. For excitement we got to watch a priest and two altar boys (sic) walk slowly up and down the aisles of the church, stopping at each one of the ‘stations’, a plaque on a far wall of the church. Some mumbling, a few prayers, then off to the next station! Rinse, repeat! 14 times! Jesus wept! Many years later, in my mid-20’s, I traveled to Europe with my brother. One afternoon, we found ourselves in a grotto with an open air display of those same dreaded stations. In my newly acquired spirit of open mindedness, I decided to walk through them ‘one last time’; suddenly, like Paul en route to Damascus, light broke over Marblehead… I got it! The Stations of the Cross are not just about Jesus’ final hours; they are about all the hours of all of our lives: First Station: Jesus is condemned to death . As are we all, condemned to death that is, from the very moment of our conception. Now is the hour of our death. To live is to die, to live our life as our death. As the Irish would say, “Jesus, we hardly knew ye.” Second Station: Jesus takes up His cross . We are born. With our first post-natal cry, each of us unwittingly accepts a role as an active participant in the pageant of life. We make our mark in the Big Book of the universe. We sign the contract. Third Station: Jesus falls for the first time . Childhood can be overwhelming. We encounter unanticipated obstacles, we stumble, we make mistakes. A road diverges in the wood, and sometimes we don’t really want to take either branch, but of course, we must choose. Jesus too! Christian doctrine holds that Jesus did not sin, but he was most certainly subject to all the same temptations we are, and he too had to make decisions. Should he obey his parents or stay teaching in the temple? Fourth Station: Jesus is met by His Blessed Mother . Who is there to pick us up when we fall? Our mothers, of course. “Kiss it and make it better.” Mothers are healing, mothers are forgiving. Most of us have our first taste of ‘the spiritual’ through our mothers: love and the ontological vistas love opens for us. Fifth Station: Simon of Cyrene helps Jesus to carry the cross . Next to our moms, no one is as important to us, growing up, as our peers. (Sorry, Dad!) Throughout our lives, but perhaps most especially during the later stages of childhood, we ‘depend on the kindness of others’. Friends make us feel we belong. Others share our same predicament. They carry our crosses as we do theirs. We’re all in this together! Sixth Station: The face of Jesus is wiped by Veronica . From tween (above) on to teen, young love is our next encounter with ‘the other’. We discover sexuality, and we experience both compassion (mother) and companionship (friends) in a single person. Seventh Station: Jesus falls a second time . The trials of adolescence. The indiscretions of our youth. Who makes the passage from 12 to 20 without copious mishaps? Eighth Station: Jesus consoles the women of Jerusalem . With adulthood comes a more mature relationship with others. We assume our places in society. We enter careers, we form families. We are now capable of mature, reciprocal relationships. “Oh, Master, grant that I may never seek so much to be consoled as to console.” (St. Francis) Ninth Station: Jesus falls a third time . The burdens of adulthood can be crushing. Now we are tempted by the sins of middle age . Tenth Station: Jesus is stripped of His garments . Ultimately, our identities unravel; we find ourselves naked again. If we are to discover our true selves, we must shed our myriad false selves, symbolized by our choice of clothing (uniforms): from sun suit to business suit to sweat suit. Eleventh Station: Jesus is nailed to the cross . We have shed our personae, but now we must put on the cloak of the cosmos, symbolized by the cross, the intersection of all that is. Now we must accept responsibility for our lives, for the part we’ve played in the evolution of the world as it has come to be. This part is no picnic. Twelfth Station: Jesus dies on the cross . Once we have wrapped ourselves tight in the cloak of the cosmos, we are absorbed into it. We die! Thirteenth Station: Jesus is laid in the arms of His Blessed Mother . Death recapitulates life. We are back in the arms of our mothers. Nothing has changed yet everything is different; everything has changed yet nothing is different. Fourteenth Station: Jesus is laid in the tomb . “It is finished!” Beyond the arms of our mothers, we are now comingled with our ancestors, with the cosmos, with Big Bang itself. At the First Station, we were condemned to death. Sentence executed! Hurry Easter! Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Aliens and the Upcoming Great Reveal David P. Bugay, PhD Apr 18, 2026 Five Converging Clues That Suggest an Extraordinary Disclosure Earth’s advertising campaign to catch the attention of aliens began in the year 1895 as we spewed radio waves and then television waves into the universe. We then became more focused in 1972 when we began marketing directly to aliens with satellites containing special plaques telling aliens where to find us. We also sent out advertising through direct satellite and radio beams. When we sell – we sell big time! The advertising campaign may have worked. Many claim aliens have responded and visited earth – and may be here right now. Sixty-five percent of Americans believe there is intelligent alien life. Almost half of us, 47%—52% believe that the intelligent aliens listened – and visited Earth. Today we are far more open about believing in aliens and visitations. Indeed, governments increasingly acknowledge unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs). Astronomers track objects entering our solar system from interstellar space. Pilots and radar systems record maneuvers that defy explanation. No single discovery proves that humanity stands on the brink of contact. Yet several independent developments appear to converge in ways that feel unprecedented. Government agencies and representatives have said that information on aliens will be released “soon.” There is a clear uptick in the number of sightings of craft with no visible means of propulsion in the skies, in the sea, and in space. Will the governments finally reveal what many have suspected are aliens? Will aliens reveal themselves? Is all this simply overactive imagination? Together, they invite a sober but unavoidable question: Are we approaching what many have come to call a Great Reveal? First, three interstellar artifacts: giant space debris or alien ships? Something enormous from another star system entered our Solar System in 2025. We named it 3I/ATLAS. It earned the name because it is the third interstellar (“3” for Third and “I” for Interstellar) to enter our Solar System since 2017. It is as big as the entire island of Manhattan. It is still here and for now, it appears to be orbiting Jupiter. It is the largest, fastest, and most active interstellar object observed. It is officially classified as a comet but has many aberrations which do not fit this profile. This includes a comet tail which points in the wrong direction, unusual chemical elements with CO2 and deuterium; we usually think of deuterium as linked with nuclear fusion power. It is said this is an ancient object; 10 to 12 billion years old. This would potentially make it older than the Sun and as old as the Milky Way Galaxy itself. The oddest thing about 3I/Atlas is the pictures of it. Today, a satellite 150+ miles away can identify a car by type, make, color, and model. Satellites can see far-off galaxies, identify individual stars, and count planets which have atmospheres. But when 3I/Atlas arrived into our Solar System, miraculously, no government camera could focus onto it. All we have received from Earth’s governments have been so fuzzy that the amateur astronomers of Earth did far better with backyard telescopes. The mystery of 3I/Atlas becomes a greater hint of things to come – because of the silence. Silence is a powerful tool to identify nondisclosure. Second, alien technology and biology can be studied – and some even reverse engineered , especially when it crashes. Technology which can make its way through the stars is certainly an advance over what we currently have on Earth; more advanced than all human technology. Sometimes these ships may crash. The material, engines, and even the beings which drive them may be of interest – and studied. The famous Area 51 is rumored to be the capital for reverse engineering alien technology. The not so famous Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio is rumored to house labs to study alien biological remnants – or live aliens. It ran Operation Blue Book which “studied” aliens and reviewed over 12,600 cases. Over the years, Area 51 was hidden until 2012 from official reports – yet it spent half a century running secret testing of numerous aerial flight craft – even off-world craft. Wright Patterson has had former employees claim witness to alien beings – usually deceased. Between these two bases and other undisclosed sites there are assertions from former employees of “off—world technology” and “off—world biology” programs. These allegations resurfaced during U.S. congressional hearings on unidentified anomalous phenomena in 2023 and 2024, reigniting public interest and media speculation. To date there has been little release of any files of programs to the public’s eye except to some congressional oversight members. The less said, the more rumors dominate the subject that reverse engineered craft or the remnants of deceased aliens—or living versions—from off-world origin are fueled by secrecy. The reverse-engineering story reflects not so much about aliens than about epistemology. Where evidence is hidden by necessity or other reasons, speculation fills the gap—and often endures longer than the secrecy that inspired it. Legends of reverse-engineered alien craft and biological remnants persists not because of what has been proven, but because of what was never allowed to be seen. Third, aliens on Earth? Tens of thousands of people have claimed to have seen or encountered aliens. Over the years the reports were laughed at until the volume and credibility grew. Then, these reports were tracked with more precision. Today, there are civilian reporting databases, academic research, and government investigations which are overwhelmed by the number of accounts. The largest of these databases include: the National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC) and the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON). Together these archive tens of thousands of sightings and close—encounter reports submitted over the decades by pilots, military personnel, and civilians. Here are some of the more credible “alien” descriptions. These descriptions range from hundreds of similar reports to some which number in the tens of thousands with similar descriptions. The Greys are the most often mentioned of alien encounters. They are said to be of a small stature (3—5 ft), grey skin, with large black almond-shaped eyes. There is also a claim that these engage in telepathic communication. The reports of this alien body type number in the tens of thousands. The Tall Whites are said to be six to eight feet tall with pale white skin, blue eyes, and blonde hair. They are mentioned in thousands of reports. These “aliens” appear mostly in military reports rather than in contact with everyday citizens. There is a special focus of these in the United States and Europe especially associated with the Nevada test ranges. The Nordics bear a resemblance to the Tall Whites. These reports numbered in the high hundreds to low thousands. There was a drop in reports which mention these after the 1970s, and it is speculated that these were replaced with the Tall Whites in reporting formats. They are described as human—looking, tall in appearance with a strong use of telepathy. Mantid / Insectoid entities are quite different. These reports tell of a tall, insect-like appearance that resembles a praying mantis in appearance. The reports on these numbers are in the high hundreds to low thousands. They are often described as overseers that direct the Greys. These tend to be consistent in their appearance in cross reporting. Skeptics beware – the volume of alien reports suggests a new reality may be in our future. Fourth, are there multi-dimensional beings? Most religions of Earth have beings which can pop into existence or out of existence. We typically call them “Angels,” “Demons,” or some variation. In religious circles we use terms such as “spirits” rather than the term “dimensional” in our dialogues. We believe these spiritual beings to be around us as “clouds of witnesses” in an invisible form, yet on occasion can assume human form. Humans live in four dimensions: height, width, length, and time. These spiritual beings are invisible as spirits yet can also dwell among us. A Biblical reference in Hebrews even says, "Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by doing so some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it." A being which can live in a spiritual world yet then step into our four-dimensional world, comes from a different place. In both science lore, science fiction, and alien lore we call that another dimension. In recent years, an increasing number of anomalous reports have clustered around a curious theme: appearance without approach . Witnesses describe individuals or objects which seem to emerge abruptly into perceptible reality—without descent, arrival, or detectable origin. Some accounts are accompanied by ambiguous photographic or video evidence suggesting figures that materialize where moments earlier no presence was observed. Angels, demons, or aliens which occupy a separate plane of existence or dimension may well account for these “comings-and-goings” through portals, dimensions, and sudden appearance. As scientific inquiry presses against the limits of spacetime and consciousness, it reenters territory once monopolized by myth—bringing with it the possibility that humanity has always been sensing the edges of a reality richer and stranger than it knows how to describe it. Many of us remain skeptical—yet for those who embrace religions where the supernatural can occur, whether angels, demons, or miracles—the jargon becomes more acceptable. Aliens step into our world through portals – crazy unless we call them angels or demons. Fifth, alien ships fill our skies and social media today. A deep body of evidence from the U.S. Department of Defense and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence report substantial increases in UAP observations. Improved reporting systems have shown reports have increased steadily year over year. Between May 2023 and June 2024 alone, the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) received 757 new UAP reports, nearly tripling the number documented from two years earlier to over 1,600 incidents. By early 2026, Pentagon officials acknowledged the number was over 2,000 UAP cases, with around 1,000 unresolved. These reports frequently include trained military/commercial pilots, radar tracking, infrared imagery, and other sensor data. These often capture objects that display unusual acceleration, maneuverability, or propulsion systems with no visible source - signature characteristics inconsistent with known aircraft. The Federal Aviation Administration’s decision to incorporate UAP reporting into formal air traffic control procedures further underscores a shift toward normalization and transparency of UAPs into daily context. The issue is no longer ignored but rather logged, analyzed, and tracked. It is focused more on posture not on denial, but on preparation. These crafts are not confined to space and clouds but even beneath the oceans. Rumors of underwater UFOs—called Unidentified Submerged Objects (USOs)—report exceptionally large craft, sometimes up to 100 meters long, moving underwater at speeds which exceed 100 knots with maneuverability far beyond conventional submarines. These are not new but can be traced back to the Cold War-era Soviet naval accounts. Senior officers then described sonar contacts tracking objects that appeared to outrun and out-dive known submarines by both the Soviets and U.S. Navy. These anecdotes involved fast-moving submerged contacts near carrier groups. Today there have been several credible military reports of transmedium incidents, including official Navy footage which show unidentified objects that transition seamlessly from air into the ocean. Crews report underwater movement inconsistent with propulsion noise or wake signatures which nothing in today’s technology can perform. The radar–sonar correlations, repeated tracks, and trained observer testimony serve as evidence that some underwater encounters remain genuinely unexplained. Things fly our skies and swim in our oceans at speeds and means unknown to humans. Conclusion: Vigilance Without Sensationalism The Great Reveal, if it comes, may not arrive as a single announcement. It may unfold through convergence—interstellar objects, persistent anomalies, institutional transparency, and cultural readiness. None of these developments alone prove extraterrestrial contact. Together, they suggest that we, as humanity, have entered a time where old assumptions no longer suffice. We have promises that governments will release various files – and we have heard those before. The universe may yet be far more inhabited—and mysterious—than we once imagined. We may have “aliens” self-reveal whether from space, under the sea, or from their dimensions. The task now is neither belief nor disbelief, but discernment. It seems now we might be ready, both government and humanity, for the Great Reveal. *** Roberto Matta’s On the Edge of a Dream (1956) is a large surrealist oil painting filled with swirling forms and vibrant colors that create a sense of shifting, multidimensional space. The work reflects Matta’s signature exploration of psychological and cosmic landscapes, blending abstraction and figuration to evoke a dreamlike, otherworldly environment. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Atheism and London Buses David Cowles Feb 28, 2023 “If a UK political party were to adopt ‘Don’t Worry, Be Happy’ as its manifesto, it would likely get no closer to the House of Commons than the Tower of London.” I have nothing against Atheism...or atheists. I’m not one, but some of my best friends are. Have you met Schopenhauer, Bakunin, Nietzsche, and Sartre! But not all atheists are besties . Richard Dawkins, the famous evolutionist and legendary ideologue, for example, is not! In 2008 – 2009, Dawkins funded the Atheist Bus Campaign in response to contemporaneous adverts sponsored by Evangelical Christians. No one remembers their ad, but everyone remembers Dawkins’ response. Imagine you’re preparing to board one of London’s iconic double decker busses and as the bus pulls up, you notice this ad plastered on its side: “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” Dawkins’ meme gives Atheism a bad name! First, the very notion of a ‘campaign’ in this context is disturbing. If there is no God, why would anyone spend their hard earned cash to convince other people of that fact? Who cares? I can understand a campaign for civil rights or disarmament but I cannot get my head around a ‘campaign for atheism’. Julian Baggini, author of Atheism – A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press, 2021) anticipated my objection. He argues that atheism is not just a negation of theism; it has its positive side as well: “…the atheist is almost always a naturalist, believing that there is only the natural world and not any supernatural one…the natural world is all there is.” Still though, this doesn’t quite explain why this ‘anti-religion’ should itself become a ‘proselytizing faith’. But enough with the speculation: “There’s probably no God.” Probably? So let me get this straight, I’m supposed to make the most important decision of my life (God or no God) based on mere probability ? Confirmed theist Blaise Pascal (c. 1650 CE) might have agreed with Dawkins (‘there probably is no God’) but Pascal went one step further, asking: What if I’m wrong? What if there is a God after all? I’m about to throw away the greatest gift this universe, or any conceivable universe, could ever confer (eternal life) based on a probability ? So Pascal did the math, and he came to the only possible conclusion (Pascal’s Wager is not a conjecture; it’s a mathematical fact): P * ∞ = ∞ where P is any number greater than 0 and no greater than 1. Pascal reasoned as follows: first, either God exists (Y)…or he doesn’t (N); second, either I believe in God (Y)…or I don’t (N). He looked at all the permutations and realized that all zero-out, except one: “I believe in God (Y) and God exists (Y)!” Y*N = 0, N*Y = 0, N² = 0…but Y² = ∞. If God exists, all I have to do is believe and I win the jackpot; and if God does not exist, nothing matters anyway so who cares? There’s no downside to faith. Probability doesn’t enter into it! Once you understand the rules of the game, there is only one possible bet. But back to the bus. The 2 nd leg of Dawkins’ illogical syllogism is even more dangerous. To suggest, as Dawkins does, that ‘God’ is a major source of ‘worry’ for theists is totally counter-factual. It is the prospect of a world without God that is ‘worrisome’…actually terrifying. Even Marx acknowledged that religion is an effective opiate. Fact is, people who believe in God, rightly or wrongly, derive a great deal of comfort from that belief. Maybe they shouldn’t but they do. Sorry, Richard! The final leg of Dawkins’ infernal triangle is the most pernicious. “Now…enjoy your life.” I don’t think I’ve been told to ‘shut-up and smile’ since I was 8 years old. The underlying assumption appears to be that ‘enjoyment’ is the purpose and meaning of life. I dream at night; sometimes those dreams are pleasurable. Is that the sort of enjoyment Dawkins is talking about? Doesn’t work for me! I’m looking for something more out of life than ‘Sweet Dreams’. It may be that ‘to sleep, perchance to dream’ is all there is, but I’m not going to accept that without a fight. I’ll side with Dylan Thomas: “Rage, rage against the dying of the light.” One thing for sure. I’m not going to spend my money trying to persuade you that dreaming is as good as it gets. Why would anyone do that? Without God, life is perpetual worry. ‘Enjoyment’ doesn’t enter in. Psalm 23 : “Yeah, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you (God) are by my side.” What adult (or even teen) can doubt that we are walking through the valley of the shadow of death? The Psalmist draws courage from the belief that we are accompanied on our journey by God, the death-slayer. From what does Richard Dawkins draw courage? A rare single malt? No judgement here: I have done! But there is an even more disturbing message buried in Dawkins’ meme, and it harks back to Rome’s bread and circuses, Marx’s opiate, and Huxley’s soma. If a UK political party were to adopt ‘Don’t Worry, Be Happy’ as its manifesto, it would likely get no closer to the House of Commons than the Tower of London. It’s hard to imagine a more reactionary platform! Beauty, Truth, and Justice are what give life meaning. The ‘function’ of God is to make these objective values operative in our world. They are normative, always and everywhere, in every possible universe, regardless of anyone’s personal predilections. The purpose of life is the advancement of values, not personal pleasure. Have you heard this one? “ On earth as it is in heaven! ” Catchy, don’t you think? Now that’s a slogan I’d pay to put on the side of a bus! Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back The Multiverse David Cowles Nov 14, 2024 “Now I feel like I’m standing at the counter of a Baskin & Robbins, answering my server’s first question…” One Sunday at dinner, an eight-year-old grandchild casually asked, “Boka, have you heard of the Multiverse.” I had. Among the many blessings I’ve enjoyed in my life is a rasher of grandchildren, any one of whom can engage me in thought-provoking conversation at the drop of a fork. There’s rarely a sit down dinner without talk turning to biology, cosmology or theology. But this Sunday’s topic made me realize that I had not given the concept of ‘Multiverse’ enough thought. The idea is simple: we live in a universe, dah! So, couldn’t there be other universes as well – places where we don’t currently reside? Of course, the answer is, “Yes!” But now I feel like I’m standing at the counter of a Baskin & Robbins, answering my server’s first question, “Can I help you?” “Yes, you can,” but I better tell you how you can help me, or we’re going to be staring at each other for a very long time and the line of potential customers behind me might become a bit unruly: “Three scoops please, Jamoca Almond Fudge, German Chocolate Cake and of course, Pralines & Cream.” Yup, those are flavors of ice cream, unrelated to candy, pastry or beverages of any kind. Like ice cream, the concept of Multiverse comes in flavors. Of course, our standard model of cosmology is built around the idea that we live in a single, unique universe, finite in space and time. In other words, not a Multiverse! Cosmology is a lot like public opinion polling. We only have access to a tiny percentage of the potential data points – because of cosmic expansion, most of the universe ‘created’ at Big Bang has already crossed the event horizon and is no longer even potentially detectable by us. Lewis Carroll notwithstanding, there’s no reason to suppose that physics ‘through the looking glass’ is any different from physics here and now. If that assumption is correct, then (1) polling will accurately predict the outcome of the next election and (2) there’s no need to posit a Multiverse. But Hugh Everett (1957) had a different idea. He thought that every event, every choice, every bifurcation ‘created’ its own unique universe. Instead of ‘many events in one universe’ Everett gave us ‘one event in one universe’. His ‘Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics’ (MWI) delivers the ultimate Multiverse – an Omniverse made up entirely of discrete universes. To be clear, most of us think of Universe as something like ‘the set of all astronomical phenomena’; Everett thinks of Universe as the set of all universes. Between ‘No Multiverse’ and ‘Only Multiverse’, there are a number of hybrid positions. Lisa Randall, for example, posits multiple self-contained universes (called ‘branes’), sharing common borders ( ergo ‘membranes’). Each universe is self-contained, probably erupting at its own Big Bang and continuing to its own Heat Death. But there’s a leak somewhere in the system. Something must cross the ‘Brane/Brane Barrier’ (BBB) or our universe would be unaffected by the others; we would have no way to detect them and no reason to want to. Our prime suspect in Leakgate is Gravity – possibly a solution to the ‘missing mass’ dilemma, perhaps preferable to the ‘dark matter’ fix. These various scenarios have more in common than you might think. For example, they all assume that the omni/multi/uni/verse is finite in space and time. Absent a transcendent creator, I find this counterintuitive. Defenders of these models struggle mightily with the 5 W’s: What, Where, When, How and Why? Finitude per se is its own mystery. Aristotle, on the other hand, didn’t worry about silly adverbs. He proposed a universe infinite in both space and time. But introducing the notion of infinity sets off its own cascade of problems, some scientific, some philosophical. For example, in an infinite universe there would be an infinite number of data points, each point assuming every possible value at least once. But in an infinite universe, every possible value of any data point will occur an infinite number of times. Plus data points form patterns. To the extent that events are independent of one another, the number of patterns they can form is infinite, and each such pattern would repeat an infinite number of times. So our universe would consist of every possible state-of-affairs repeated an infinite number of times. Ugh! Now, if I have a Universe defined as everything that could possibly happen, happening an infinite number of times, and forming an infinite number of patterns, each recurring an infinite number of times…do I have anything at all? Or have I just found a clever way to say, “Nothing!” Not a Multiverse, not a Universe, Nothing. Remember Gregory Bateson’s ontological criterion: a difference that makes a difference . In an infinite model, nothing is different (unique) and therefore nothing makes any difference per se ; everything that can happen, does happen, and it happens an infinite number of times, in an infinite number of contexts, regardless of whatever may have happened before. So the unique universe you and I grew up in, unthinking, has challengers now. MWI has introduced the concept of an Omniverse, Lisa Randall et al. have sketched the outline of a true Multiverse, and finally, Aristotle gave us what is the functional equivalent of an Anti-verse. So yes, I have heard of the Multiverse…but so far, I’m not sold. Keep the conversation going. 1. Click here to contact us on any matter. How did you like the post? How could we do better in the future? Suggestions welcome. 2. To subscribe (at no cost) to TWS and ATM, follow this link . 3. We encourage new articles and reprints from freelance writers ; click here to view out Writers’ Specs Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Robin Hood's Mary Men David Cowles Mar 11, 2026 “Could it be that Robin’s Merry Men are really Mary Men, devoted, like their leader, to the cult of the Blessed Virgin?” Our post-Enlightenment North Atlantic culture draws a bright red line separating fact and fiction. Where the line is drawn and by whom is another matter entirely. We believe there is such a line IRL, even if we can’t say exactly where it is. Most other cultures, however, are a bit more flexible. They understand that history and mythology represent theoretical poles of a fuzzy continuum. George Washington, for example, is certainly an historical figure but many legends (e.g. a certain cherry tree) traditionally attach to him as well. Rarely, but occasionally, a character appears for whom the overlap of history and legend is essential , not just accidental. Think King Arthur or Jean d’Arc. Robin Hood is one of those who explicitly bridge history and legend. It is highly likely that the story of Robin Hood began as the story of a flesh and blood individual. We just can’t say which individual. Several potential ‘Robins’ have been identified in the historical record, but we don’t know which of them, if any, was actually ‘the Hood’. Here’s what we can claim to know about Robin with a reasonable degree of confidence: He lived in a forest near Nottingham with a man called ‘Little John’ and assorted other Merry Men . He was fiercely religious, a ‘daily communicant’, and specially devoted to the cult of the Virgin Mary. He strenuously opposed both the rapacious secular authority (King John) and the opulent church hierarchy. He advocated for a fundamental redistribution of wealth. His signature meme could double as a 21 st century political slogan: Rob the Rich to Give to the Poor . 2500 years earlier, it would have simply been: Jubilee! He was an early practitioner of what’s now called Propaganda of the Deed , defined by Wikipedia as “direct action intended to influence public opinion…(and) meant to serve as an example for others to follow, acting as a catalyst for social revolution.” The lives of Jesus and the Apostles are paradigms of Direct Action, i.e. communicating the Gospel message by living it. Likewise, the early church ( Acts of the Apostles ). Others associated with Propaganda of the Deed include monastic orders, various utopian communities, the Black Panther Party, the Fruit of Islam, Hippies, Yippies (vs. Yuppies) and the Weather Underground. Today, Propaganda of the Deed is associated with the Anarchist Movement. He subscribed to a cosmology and an ethics grounded in the concept of Natural Law: Nature’s Processes x(Oral Torah) instantiate, reveal ( Aletheia ), and communicate God’s laws (Written Torah). The moral quality of a society is reflected in the fecundity of its land and the health of its monarch. (Grail Legend) Based on the near unanimous testimony of the earliest source material, these aspects of Robin’s story would seem to meet the standard criteria for ‘unambiguous historical truth’. Nonetheless, for our purposes, it matters not whether these things are true as history just so long as they ring true as mythology. Accordingly, the character of Robin Hood , as reported and/or imagined, can be understood as the intersection of disparate cultural and intellectual threads: Popular opposition to King John in favor of his brother Richard Coeur de Lion . Revolt of the nobles leading to the Magna Carta . The Virgin Mary as the Christian cognate of various pagan Earth goddesses - Mother Nature, Gaia , Easter , et al. The Magnificat (Luke 1: 46 – 52) – militant Mary’s prescription for socioeconomic justice: “He (YHWH) has thrown down the rulers from their thrones but lifted-up the lowly. The hungry he has filled with good things but the rich he has sent away empty.” May Day - the date traditionally set aside to celebrate fertility (human & agricultural) and to promote economic justice. Also, the first day of the month chosen by the Church for special Marian devotions and the date most often set aside for the secular celebration of labor. The Maypole, symbol traditionally associated with Robin Hood – a single, vertical tree, Yggdrasil , the axis mundi , Joyce’s omphalos, the umbilical cord of the universe. The maypole symbolizes the connection between heaven and earth, the transcendent and the immanent. Today, a Maypole is decorated every May in honor of the Blessed Virgin. But how does Robin’s sparse biography allow us to connect him to the cult of the Virgin Mary? The forest location is the first clue. Forests and even individual trees were divine according to the Celtic Druids, early disciples of Natural Law. Robin attended Mass several times each day, all while hiding to avoid the Sheriff's posse. With Robin, the grove has its altar! (Ezra Pound) Robin ignores the contingent laws of church and state and instead follows the necessary precepts of Natural Law. A slightly later tradition introduces a ‘love interest’ for Robin, the beautiful Maid Marian. In traditional May Day lore (late 13 th century France), Maid Marian was a shepherdess who was also “Queen of the May” (a title now reserved for Mary, the Mother of God). So, who is Robin’s Marian, really? Texts suggest an alternate spelling of her name: ‘Marion’, a derivative of ‘Mary’. Is it possible that ‘Maid Marian’ and ‘Mary, the mother of Jesus’, are one and the same person? Is it possible that Robin’s storied love affair is a metaphor for his mystical attachment to Mary? This may also shed light on another mystery, Robin’s Merry Men . What makes a bunch of outlaws, hiding in Sherwood Forest for fear of the Sherriff, living off the land and facing almost certain torture and execution if caught, so darn merry ? Could it be that Robin’s Merry Men are really Mary Men , devoted, like their leader, to the cult of the Blessed Virgin? In that case, can we understand Robin’s ‘movement’ as the manifestation of Mary’s eschatological vision ( Magnificat ) as concrete social action? Is the phenomenon we call ‘Robin Hood’ a translation of Mary’s Magnificat into a political Manifesto, communicated broadly via the language of Direct Action (above)? *** Daniel Maclise’s Robin Hood and His Merry Men (1839) presents the outlaw band as noble, theatrical figures gathered in a lush, idealized Sherwood Forest. The painting captures the Victorian fascination with medieval heroism, turning Robin Hood into a symbol of camaraderie, justice, and romantic rebellion. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Black Hole David Cowles May 19, 2022 “…We just caught our first glimpse of the big black hole that lies, curled up like my favorite pussy cat, at the center of our galaxy.” In early May, thanks to images captured by the aptly named Event Horizon Telescope, we caught our first glimpse of the big black hole that lies, curled up like my favorite pussy cat, at the center of our galaxy. Long ago, before anyone knew anything about black holes, we fortuitously named our galaxy The Milky Way. Apparently even then, we somehow sensed that one day, we would be lapped up like a saucer of milk. Yet, it was oddly comforting to ‘see’ so clearly the ultimate destiny of our spatiotemporal world. Like characters in Douglas Adams’ The Restaurant at the end of the Universe , we sit, peacefully, gazing into the abyss, gazing quite literally at nothing . Besides, this black hole is 26,000 light-years away. But it was also disconcerting, because, make no mistake, my kitty will wake up, and when she does… Well, let’s just say that what I described as “26,000 light-years away” will soon be described as “26,000 light-years close.” Fortunately, Being has another, non-spatial, non-temporal dimension that, thankfully, is beyond the reach of my cat’s tongue. I wonder, “Is my cat aware of this non-extensive dimension just beyond her grasp?” Are we? Image: The first image of the black hole at the center of our Milky Way, Sagittarius A*. Credit: NASA/Event Horizon Telescope. Full caption here. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Who Dunnit? David Cowles Oct 4, 2022 “Was it Colonel Mustard in the Conservatory with the Wrench? Or…” Ever play the game of Clue ? Who dunnit? Was it Colonel Mustard in the conservatory with the wrench? Or Professor Plum in the library with the candlestick? There are 324 potential combinations of suspects (6), weapons (6), and venues (9); and all 324 possible combinations (6 x 6 x 9) are equally probable. Your job, should you choose to accept it, is to reduce 324 potentialities down to one actuality. The game of Cosmology is a greatly simplified version of Clue . You have no opponents! You play the game alone, and you play until you win… or give up trying. Bora-boring! Why is it then that the world’s best minds (carbon or silicon) have been playing Cosmology for at least the last 10,000 years (and probably for many tens of thousands of years before that)? Shoot, it even tops Dungeons and Dragons. “Why are things the way they are?” It seems we can’t help but ask this question. Apparently, M. Descartes, Sum ergo quaero (I am, therefore I seek). But when we do seek to unravel this mystery, it appears that the range of possible solutions is unexpectedly narrow. Consider the following two possibilities: #1 Whatever happens, happens! No further explanation is necessary or even possible. Happening is happenstance! Sidebar #1 : This does not mean that events must occur randomly. Causality and/or other forms of correlation could characterize certain subdomains (‘societies’ or even ‘epochs’ in the terminology of Alfred North Whitehead); also, events themselves have the capacity to form societies and epochs, but any such subdomains would have to be situated in a meta-domain, and the ultimate meta- domain would have to be happenstance. #2 Whatever happens, happens as a result of will (extrinsic or intrinsic). Extrinsic will : things happen according to plan or as directed ad hoc. Note: plan and ad hoc are only distinct in a spatiotemporal context. Otherwise, they are synonymous. Intrinsic will : things happen according to their own free will in the context of a specific actual world. Sidebar #2 : All things (events) are causa sui , but not all things are causa sui ex nihilo . Sidebar #3 : Freedom in the absence of an actual world is happenstance (above). It is the relevant presence of an actual world that enables an event to proceed according to will rather than chance. Will react to world! Amazingly, certain very popular conceptions turn out to be just sub-versions of the two models above: Whatever happens, happens as a result of the initial conditions of the Universe (Big Bang). If initial conditions are the result of happenstance, then see #1 above. If initial conditions result from will, then see #2 . Whatever happens, happens as a result of things that happened in the past (causality). If ‘things in the past’ occurred by happenstance, then see #1 above. If ‘things in the past’ occurred by will, then see #2 above. Whatever happens, happens in the service of a particular future (teleology). If ‘things in the future’ occur by happenstance, then see #1 above. If ‘things in the future’ occurred by will, then see #2 above. So, it turns out that we’re saying something pretty big here! Any cosmological model that relies on efficient causation (so-called cause and effect) or final causation (purpose, meaning) is merely a sub-version of either model #1 (happenstance) or model #2 (will) above. So, your universe comes with a choice of flavors, but just three flavors (don’t want to spoil you): · Vanilla (happenstance) · Chocolate (extrinsic will: God?) · Strawberry (intrinsic will: freedom!) So, pretty simple, right? Ok, but maybe not quite so simple! Have you considered the possibility of a hybrid model: Some events just happen; some events are willed extrinsically; and some events are willed intrinsically. There’s nothing intrinsically – pun intended – wrong with a hybrid model; it doesn’t undermine anything we’ve said above. On the contrary, we just extended our models’ reach… as long as you can figure out what goes where, i.e., how the different domains interact. Good luck with that. Thoughts While Shaving is the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine ( ATM) . To never miss another Thought, choose the subscribe option below. Also, follow us on any one of our social media channels for the latest news from ATM. Thanks for reading! Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back What Christianity Got Right David Cowles Jul 25, 2024 “Christianity cannot exist as part of contemporary culture; it is an alternative to it. It is the antidote.” “All religions are essentially the same, right? I mean, they all believe in a higher power and they all urge us to behave morally.” There’s a name for this. It’s called syncretism , the belief that ‘all religions are compatible’. This way of thinking is well suited to today’s moral relativism and democratic anthropology. We want to build a tent so big that almost everyone…and everything…fits in. To say that someone is wrong or that someone is more right than someone else goes against the modern grain, unless we’re talking about politics – in which case I am always right and everyone else is always flat out wrong, right? From a Christian perspective, it is laudable to admire the spiritual practices of Eastern religions, the historicity of Judaism, and animism's respect for the natural world. But it is a great mistake not to recognize and appreciate the beliefs and practices that make Christianity different from all others. Christianity, especially Catholicism, is unique among the world’s faiths. I do not wish to debate whether various Christian doctrines and rituals have congruence with other religions. I will assert, however, that taken together, these doctrines clearly make Christianity unique…in very important ways. It is fashionable now to believe that all faith is superfluous. After all, science is close to giving us all the answers we need, isn’t it? And you certainly don’t need God to show you how to be ‘good’, do you? Sound familiar? We live in an anti-clerical age; in many ways the Church has brought this on itself. Church has lost the courage of its convictions; it no longer knows how to talk about what it believes. Like a shy middle schooler, it is desperate to fit in…which only makes its isolation more pronounced. In the Middle Ages, bishops sat next to nobles at the king’s banquet table. Oh, how the hierarchy hungers to regain such lost respect! But as any high school survivor knows, respect is won by having convictions and sticking to them, by standing up for yourself, and by living an authentic life, i.e. a life consistent with your professed beliefs. For Christianity, I’m afraid that that ship has sailed! While specific congregations hold on tenaciously to certain doctrines, the Christian Weltanschauung (world view) has all but disappeared. Christianity cannot survive by tacking its counter cultural doctrines onto secular scaffolding. Christianity is the most radical ideology extant in the world today. By far, bar none! Own it! You can’t hide it. But just how radical is it? Let’s take a peek at some of its greatest hits: Trinity – God is not some single minded despot. God is process and Trinity is the minimal structure necessary for process. (A > B > C > A) Logos – “In the beginning was the Word ( logos ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…All things came to be through the Word… In him was life and that life was the light…and darkness has not overcome it.” (John 1: 1 – 5) The order of the Universe is not the product of chance but a manifestation of God. God is order and order God. Incarnation – ‘Godmen’ abound, demiurges that combine aspects of divinity with aspects of humanity. Christ is different; Christ is “true God and true man,” wholly human and wholly divine. Christ is the superposition of two distinct states of being. Apparently, the Council of Nicaea was hip to Quantum logic long before Schoedinger. Incarnation turns the Universe inside out...like an old sock. God created, sustains, and redeems the spatiotemporal world; he is the Alpha (Father) and the Omega (Son) and the Spirit that infuses every moment in between. But this same God is also a quantum (one life) within that world. The whole is a part of itself. Transubstantiation – The material world of ‘substances and accidents (qualities)’ is real; it is not an illusion. But neither is it ultimate reality . Neither time and space, nor matter and energy, nor substance and accident are immutable. Bread and wine can…and do…become the Body and Blood of Christ (Eucharist). “Never could learn to drink that blood and call it wine.” (Bob Dylan) The Great Commandment – Loving your neighbor as yourself is not just an ethical precept. It identifies the self with the other and with God. (Yet the crucial distinctions are not blurred.) Whatever you do for or to others, you do for or to God, and for or to yourself. Ethics is Trinitarian too. Every subject is its own object and every object its own subject. English verbs come in two voices: active and passive. Neither captures what is going on during an event. Expressing the Christian world view calls for a Middle Voice , a grammatical form that has disappeared from most Indo-European languages. How can we expect to sit at the cool kids’ table when we don’t even speak their language? Eternity – The spatiotemporal world is limited by space and time. It had a beginning and it will have an end. But whatever happens happens and cannot unhappen. To be is to be eternally. Being is eternal. Being is eternity. Resurrection – We endure, not as ‘shades’ but as ‘glorified bodies’, wholly material, wholly spiritual. Christianity is not an Idealism (Hegel) but a Materialism (Marx). Death marks the end of our temporal lives, but it clears the deck for eternal life. Apocalypse – “The last enemy to be destroyed is death…that God may be all in all.” (1 Cor. 15: 25, 28) If these doctrines are true, they cannot exist as footnotes to contemporary, secular culture. To believe these things and then to live life as though they made no difference is madness. Christianity cannot exist as part of contemporary culture; it is an alternative to it. It is the antidote. We can’t do without it! Keep the conversation going. 1. Click here to comment on this TWS. 2. To subscribe (at no cost) to TWS and ATM, follow this link . 3. We encourage new articles and reprints from freelance writers ; click here to view out Writers’ Specs. Keep the conversation going. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.