Science Without the Notion of the Infinite

Archayus
15 min readJun 25, 2022

by Archayus

Science in its broadest definition represents a particular pathway to obtaining knowledge. It has the inherent strength of developing rational concepts of the Universe. Rationality, because of its non-personal nature, lends itself to collective development, therefore individuals can work in groups and support the work of the whole. The downside is when the individual finds himself giving exclusive importance to rational conceptions and adopting a mentality which is out of balance with the whole man. What is developed in a community must have some basis for transmission among the members. It is fundamentally more difficult to transmit understanding of something that is purely subjective without giving it a rational form. Therefore the personal aspect of knowledge is based on the individual and not on the collective. The individual in this aspect of knowledge is more on his own. When trying to understand fire, he can assimilate logical concepts about fire such as its chemical structure and its behavioral characteristics. But in order to gain deeper knowledge he must personally experience fire in terms of heat and light. The rational concept represents one complementary aspect of knowledge but does constitute complete knowledge in itself.

In science, the individual must contend with the psychological challenges of developing knowledge through group effort and how the group “thinks” will affect him personally. Somehow he must learn to strike a balance between personal knowledge and impersonal. If he relies too heavily on the community he will negate the inner vital nature of knowledge. If he goes too much inward, he will risk separating himself from the community. Technically, the latter approach is not a problem in the sense that one individual can rationalize his personal, intuitively-derived concepts which can then be assimilated by the whole. Most of the fundamental breakthroughs in the history of science have been achieved in this way. Kepler and Newton did the most fundamental aspect of their work inwardly, working alone. The former approach, relying too much on the group, can be a problem because without a personal basis for knowledge then the individual becomes hardly more than a computer — possessing facts and ideas but not in a living, vital, subjective way and therefore not being “spiritually” impacted (i.e. evolved) by knowledge due to the lack of the personal factor. True knowledge is nourishing to the spirit, and if science is about true knowledge then this must be the result for the individual. When the practice of science is balanced between the rational and the personal factors and developed in the context of the needs of man then the results will be beneficial for humanity as a whole. The personal factor is the basis for morality and ethics, since the inner spiritual sense can only be known to the individual himself and not to the group. Thus only the individual has conscience, whereas the group per se does not. As such, when science becomes too impersonal and collective then its fruit can become dangerous and destructive.

Generally, having a discriminating intellect with regards to the nature of the qualities that go into the creation of a form is more personal than “objective”. Objective implies logic and logic implies that which is straightforward, such as X = Y. But because qualities can take enumerable disparate and different forms, then recognizing them is not a simple question of logic. It requires a sense of affinity with the nature of an object, a feeling, and relies on a kind of “spiritual” development (here we refer to spirit in the technical sense as an intrinsic aspect of consciousness which is not specifically connected to any particular religious ideas).

As the practice of science becomes more communal, more material, more rational, and overall less “spiritual”, then it will tend towards the aspects of the Universe which can be dealt with logically and which do not require a more subjective appreciation. This is why in the modern age, which has a deeply-held materialism, we see a science that ignores, dismisses, or rejects aspects of human experience which can only be assessed qualitatively and not solely logically.

Astrology and Science

Astrology is a good example of the above. Astrology is an analysis of the qualitative aspects of the Universe which form part of the basis for the manifestation of anything that can be characterized by a quality, such as an event, an experience, a thought, or a concrete form. As such, qualities can be stirred into manifestation and then take any and all possible forms. Thus, identifying the qualities of events and forms is not a straightforward, linear exercise. It thus becomes difficult to substantiate astrological statements for this reason, because no one can say definitively that such and such an event is a direct expression of a particular astrological condition. The only approach that logic could take in this regard is to statistically analyze large numbers of events. But this is difficult because of the lack of good data available, and even then is still more open to subjective interpretation than strictly material, concrete statements. There is far less of a basis to say “X = Y”, because the quality is intangible and its manifestation variable. The basis may be completely valid and real but is difficult to pin down and define in a concrete way.

Because astrology does not lend itself to firm statements of causality it is not as amenable to concrete scientific analysis. This does not mean that one cannot approach it scientifically, but that it involves a fundamentally wider field of activity — beyond the strictly material — and so that multiples the scientific challenges. Again, it does not mean that astrology cannot be looked at as a science, but it’s easy to see why in this age of materialism that it has become marginalized in terms of mainstream study. This was not always the case in the past, but is more clearly so in modern times. Ultimately, astrology is a science because it is based on the rational analysis of qualitative factors.

Though it is difficult to say with “certainty” that there is a connection between planetary movements and human experience, it does not mean that there is no ultimate basis for this supposition. Genuine knowledge, as discussed previously, includes a subjective factor and so the wider the scope of inquiry the less feeling of certainty one may be confronted with. Certainty is partly a matter of faith and because of this is based on individual, subjective experience. A person may feel certain inwardly but it will be impossible to communicate that certainty to others, despite its ultimate validity. From this perspective, it should generally be considered a weakness to require group consensus in order to feel certain about something. Certain things lend themselves to consensus validation — certain things do not. Knowledge in its ultimate sense encompasses both types.

Astrology seems absurd to a materialist science because this science lacks a true, vital notion of the Infinite. Material science deals with the material, whereas the principles of astrology are found in the subtle while their effects have a material component. But too often a material science feels as if the material component of the Universe is the only aspect that can be considered real because it is the only aspect that can be “objectively” confirmed. It says, “For every actions there is an equal and opposite reaction.” Based on this notion, astrology seems illogical because it’s difficult to fathom a tangible basis by which the remote stars influence particular events in the day-to-day lives of people. Furthermore, there appears to be no way to causally link the map of the solar system at the time of birth with the events that manifest many years later. Then, seeing the baseless claims made by inept, naive, over-imaginative, or newspaper astrologers which make claims based on broad categories of people, the case for astrology seems shut by orthodox science.

But the problem here is not with the essential nature of astrology itself, it’s with the underlying assumptions by which it is judged. Astrology deals with the analysis of the qualitative influences which give rise to forms and events. Since the same qualities can take various forms, it is difficult to say definitively and with precision that such-and-such planetary configuration at birth has led to such-and-such event. When it comes to the concrete manifestation of qualities, nothing can be said with certainty.

If, however, one factors in the notion of the Infinite, one is better able to theorize about the principles that underlie astrology. You could, for instance, say that since qualities are abstract and not concrete, they represent that which is intermediate between Oneness and the created form or event which ultimately originates from it. Because they have infinite variety while still retaining their essential nature, and can be mapped out “archetypally”, then they represent higher principles. As such, their nature is more subtle and can only be known directly through subjective experience. Analogously, the Sun may represent Oneness, and the twelve regions of the Zodiac represent the qualitative unfolding of Oneness (evidence for this is indicated because each house of the Zodiac pertains to particular primordial opposites, such as male and female, the four elements, et cetera; ultimately, two opposites form a whole). The star constellations which are associated with each region of the Zodiac are simply convenient markers for that region — the physical stars may have little or no relevance for the qualitative nature of that region.

Furthermore, the expression of any form goes through various stages of genesis, or “becoming”. A seed will germinate, sprout, grow into a tree, flower, bear fruit, and then distribute more seed. The tree in all its aspects was inherent in the seed from the very beginning, but could only be expressed in the given matrix (the four elements) and through time. Similarly, any particular phenomenon proceeds from Oneness and through various stages until it realizes its innate nature. The time of birth may represent the astrologically conducive moment for the beginning of this unfolding as it pertains to various phases in human life and the innate qualities present in the seed. If the beginning time is known, then the rest of the phases can be determined. Each phase may be dominated by a particular qualitative nature. In astrology it cannot be said exactly what form qualities may take on the practical level, but only that certain qualities will be predominating at a certain time and to a certain extent.

One may theorize that in the subtle substratum which underlies the material aspect of the Universe, that creative energies and forces are characterized by given qualities which become essential in their formation and expression on the material level. The creative process is driven by cosmic impulse which ultimately originates in Oneness. Any object, event, etc, must by its essential nature come into being, be expressed, and dissipate. The nature of this expression will be exactly analogous to the inherent quality of the creative seed which represents its original, undifferentiated state. The quality of the seed will be expressed on the material level by various aspects which describe anything that has particular characteristics. Events, for example, have innate qualities, especially as they pertain to human experience. They can be innately felt to be positive or negative, active or passive, beautiful or banal, and so forth. The event will express a particular vibration, tone, or character which stems from its underlying nature. It can be no other way — an oak seed will always grow into an oak tree and not a fern. Thought and feeling carry particular vibrations which, though not material, may be considered “quasi-material” (i.e. subtle, but nonetheless tangible) and therefore give expression to qualities in a manner similar to material forms.

The dynamics of the subtle substratum which gives rise to these expressions are what are analyzed in a science of astrology. On a certain level, the twelve regions of the Zodiac represent the passive element in creation (the “soil”), and the planets represent the active element (the “seed”). This is so when one considers the Sun as representing Oneness, and thus represents the ultimate unity of the opposites which differentiate as the Zodiac as well as being the unifying factor in the planetary orbits. This dynamic gives rise to the subtle “energetic” ambience which forms the fertile field (i.e. creative substratum) in which material expressions in the solar system originate.

One notes that “white” light from the Sun unfolds into seven primary colors when passing through a prism. At the same time, there are seven tones in an inherent musical expression (the eighth representing the start of a new octave). In terms of how Oneness unfolds in a complete manifestation, seven is a key number. In the subtle human body, there are seven primary chakras. In astrology, there are seven key physical planets, which are analogous to all these systems (the nature of each planet can be indicated by a color, metal, tone, etc). Other key numbers are three (e.g. the prism), four (e.g. the elements), twelve, and so on. In this way, astrology, and the solar system as a whole, represent an analysis of the primordial relationship between manifestation and Oneness which forms the creative matrix that gives rise to the various activity and development within the solar system. It is an analysis of the progression from the subtle to the gross which happens through the expression of the Infinite on the level of time and space.

Whether these concepts of astrology are ultimately reflective of its scientific nature or not is outside the scope of this work. They only represent particular theories which illustrates that astrology can be looked at and potentially understood on a logical basis by incorporating the notion of the Infinite into analytical reasoning.

Again, while the quality is general and universal, the variety of forms and expressions the quality can take is essentially endless. This is why a strictly linear, logical form of science finds astrology problematic. The error comes in assuming that materialist science is altogether complete and so astrology must be invalid. Although astrology may be challenging to ascertain on a rational basis, it is not impossible — but the first step is affirming that the critical limitation is with the way science itself is conceptualized and not actually with the general notion of astrology.

When a material science fails to incorporate the principle of the Infinite, then it necessarily loses its ability to explain many experienced phenomena in a logical and rational way. But it is absurd to say that because a particular phenomena cannot be explained according to material based “objective” logic and reasoning that it cannot actually exist or be valid for scientific scrutiny. Thus the problem is not with that something like astrology is inherently illogical, but only that its nature falls outside the narrow logic of the strictly materialist way of thinking.

The Case of Quantum Entanglement

Quantum entanglement is a term which represents the observation in quantum physics that two particles of equal properties which are separated by a given distance will retain an identification such that the manipulation of one particle individually will cause the same response in the other particle. From a materialist point of view, this is enigmatic because there appears to be a communication between the two particles which must logically traverse the distance between them at a rate higher than the speed of light which is assumed to be the maximum possible speed for all phenomena. Thus there is an “entanglement” of two quantum objects.

The problem is resolved once the fundamental factor of the Infinite is incorporated into the dynamic by which the material forms operate. The Infinite is the common factor of all diverse forms, and so incorporating the notion of the Infinite on a logical basis as part the logical analysis of the nature of forms is the key to understanding various diverse phenomena which defy strictly materialist observations. Quantum entanglement is one such phenomenon. The basic idea is that when two disparate objects resonate at the exact same frequency, then an identification is formed between them. Here, “between” is a misleading term, because the principle of identification transcends space and time and thus there is no space to be represented by the term. As all material phenomena have their essential nature in the Infinite, then the will which resonates on the level of the Infinite will by definition affect the outward manifestation. On a technical level, will is expressed by frequency, oscillation, vibration, and other properties. Because the quantum level is subtle enough, being the smallest material level conceptually, then it lends itself to observing the effect of identification more materially and empirically.

Consciousness is more subtle than all material phenomena, including quantum phenomenon, and forms the fundamental basis of the human mind. This then gives the human being the innate capacity to operate on the level of the Infinite, assuming that his mind is properly modulated and under his control. Traditionally, the principle of “magic” is based on the identification between two or more disparate objects through the medium of consciousness. The will, then, that controls consciousness can also affect the “remote” object. Consciousness can be manipulated and changed in a number of ways, from outright conscious manipulation to the more indirect means of symbol. The symbol — which can be an image or ritualistic gesture — evokes consciousness which is qualitatively the same as its nature and thus may serve as a mechanism of modulation and control. In this case, conscious understanding of the principle of identification between the symbol and the consciousness need not occur — only innocent faith in its reality, depth of concentration, and other factors.

Because the ultimate nature of the human being is identical to the nature of the Universe as a whole, then the human being technically has the innate capacity to become identified with any particular aspect of Nature — from individual objects, to dynamics of cause and effect, and to broader principles in general — and thus has the capacity to elicit change in a way that transcends strictly material causality. But the basis of this lies within the individual, in the non-corporeal aspect of his being, and as such requires an effective degree of genuine consciousness of self. The degree to which this is true will vary greatly from person to person, and effectively deals with the personal aspect as opposed to the collective. Thus those who hold to a materialist perspective will deny the reality of trans-material phenomena due to the apparently non-empirical nature of the phenomena. But the basis of this assumption, when seen from a wider perspective, is ultimately invalid due to its critical limitation. Because the practice of theoretical science implies the discovery of the rational form of the Universe itself, then there is no need to discard rational thinking in order to break the limitation of materialism. True rationality demands the recognition of all phenomena and so must incorporate notions of the Infinite and its corollary notions such as Quality and these notions can fundamentally augment the logical and philosophical image.

The term “quantum entanglement” itself is misleading because it is based on the material analysis of two objects founded on the notion of separation in space. Go beyond “space” and the objects are not ultimately separate at all — they are only separate in terms of one particular perspective or manifestation. The deeper level of causality fundamental to their being becomes activated by their mutual identification through sameness of frequency. Frequency, rhythm, oscillation, etc, are also fundamental to the qualitative aspect of material objects which forms the intermediate “link” between the Infinite and their material aspect. In reality, there is no distinction between the Infinite and a material aspect — the material gives the impression to the mind of distinctness, but as a form it can never be separated from its essential nature which is Infinity itself.

The notion of “entanglement” or identification can also plainly be seen on the psychological level. That which occurs within, such as emotions, are meant to play out through their manifestation as conscious experience. If conscious awareness of a feeling is negated, then the subtle but tangible body of the feeling will remain unconscious and in the unmanifest state. It may be made unconscious due to the reaction of the mind, for example, because of its disturbing nature (in the case of a traumatic experience) or be considered “taboo” for some reason. When the mind becomes attuned to the unconscious object and essentially resonates with the same “frequency”, then an identification is formed between the conscious and unconscious aspects. This then draws the nature of the unconscious content out into consciousness and through this the content is manifested and played out and in this way dissipated inwardly. What remains on the subtle level remains essentially undivided, and when it reaches the material level of consciousness, it becomes conscious experience and is spontaneously divided into its essential components and thus ceases to exist in its previous formed state. Its essential qualitative nature will synthesize with the milieu in such a way as to give rise to a form which is defined by the harmony of the qualitative “impulse” with the receptive milieu. This will then become the basis upon which the resulting form will be take shape.

For a human being, all things can be known through attunement, affinity, and identification, since the human being has a fundamentally higher capacity than other creatures to consciously access the Infinite aspect of being.

Copyright © 2018 David Archayus Caruso

--

--

Archayus

I write about the nature of the mind and the Universe. (At the moment I am not promoting this site.) I can be contacted at caruso@archayus.com