March 8, 2023
Dear Leland and Everett,
I listened to a podcast recently between Donald Hoffman and Lex Fridman that sorta blew my mind. I’ll need to give a very brief summary of what he said so that I can underscore what I find particularly interesting.
Dr. Hoffman started with an assertion that ‘spacetime is doomed’. He gave a bit of background of which I was not aware: in Einstein’s proofs, he posits spacetime as fundamental. Relativity and quantum physics held up in experiments, so we began to assume Einstein was correct in assuming spacetime was fundamental. Now, apparently, physicists are starting to realize that spacetime isn’t as fundamental as we previously thought, and that Einstein’s theories don’t hold up as universally as we expected.
The point is not that Einstein is wrong. For comparison, think of Newton. Newtonian physics are still incredibly useful: we put a man on the moon using Newtonian physics. And yet, Einstein proved that Newtonian physics were incomplete, and not valid outside of certain parameters (it just so happened that Newtonian physics held up within the parameters of what humans generally experience in life). In the same way, today’s physicists won’t ‘disprove’ relativity so much as they are discovering that it breaks down outside certain parameters.
This revelation interests me because so much of our current understanding of the world stems from the assumption that spacetime is fundamental. As Dr. Hoffman pointed out, biologists have spent the last ~70 years attempting to understand how human consciousness sprung from spacetime. The theory goes that, since spacetime is fundamental, somehow in the evolution of the universe, after magma solidified into water and rock, after the formulation of microorganisms, and later the evolution into plants, sea creatures, land creatures, and eventually humans…eventually human consciousness came into being, somehow manifest from matter in the physical world. We know consciousness exists, well, because we are aware of our awareness. But how did this awareness come into being? We’ve never been able to figure that out.
Dr. Hoffman posits that the relationship works the other way: that consciousness is fundamental, and that spacetime is emergent (e.g. that consciousness creates spacetime, not vice versa). I’ll leave speculation regarding whether Dr. Hoffman is correct to science and history. For now I just want to take a moment to underscore and celebrate what potential breakthroughs are upon us.
Humans have spent the last several centuries wrestling with the apparent dichotomy between faith and reason. There was a world we ‘knew’, insofar as we could experience, test, and replicate aspects of it; and then there was religion, which was balm people apparently used to explain away the complexities of the universe that they couldn’t comprehend. While the major religions have held up in the face of onslaught over the centuries, there’s a tacit assumption that we are currently in the process of moving past religion once and for all.
But a world devoid of spirituality is so bland! So lifeless! So devoid of wonder. Cut off from so much of our creativity. It’s astonishing how often artists (whether painters, poets, writers, or musicians) describe the creative process as if they were merely serving as conduits, allowing the art to flow out of them. Psychedelics are bending our understanding of reality, particularly when folks (like scientists) who should ‘know better’ talk about dimensions other than the physical world we live in, and talk about the experiences from their psychedelic journeys as if they were real. Not that psychedelics are required: a sufficient level of prayer or meditation can lead to basically the same level of awareness, the same sense of connection to the Infinite, and the same recognition that we individually are small and rather pathetic, but connected to God we are almost infinitely capable.
Rationalists (be they atheists, agnostics, or anyone else who doubts the existence of God) would likely argue that all spiritual experiences are in fact scientifically explainable. Perhaps we are accessing memories or other aspects of the mind when in altered states of artistic expression, prayer, or on a psychedelic journey. Perhaps! I’m starting to embrace duality, so no longer assume that this is an either/or distinction. But if forced to choose, I believe that humans have access to intelligence, information, and energy that rests outside our bodies, but can be accessed via purposeful spiritual exploration.
Reverting back to the schism between faith and reason: I’ve come to realize that this itself is a false dichotomy. No human is devoid of faith. Each individual rests his or her faith on something. In fact, people can put faith in many things (our parents, or teachers, or the New York Times, or the Republican party, or Western medicine, or free markets, or the American constitution), but I submit that every human rests their ultimate faith in something. Partly this is due to cost of deep thought: humans don’t have the cognitive capacity to always reason from first principles, and so by necessity take shortcuts. We constantly make assumptions, or (more importantly) establish certain authorities as having sufficient credibility that we trust what they tell us. These cognitive shortcuts are relatively automatic, such that we dramatically underestimate how many things we think we ‘know’ are really just expressions of faith.
But I also think people all have a core belief, some central article of faith, around which they build all others. For the religious, the central article of faith is generally pretty transparent: it’s some form of god. For the rationalists, I submit that they are putting their faith in human capacity for reason. I personally find that worldview flawed, because the human mind is just too complex and flawed a reasoning device to be so entrusted. But what’s more important to me is not convincing the rationalists that they are wrong, but highlighting that the rationalists, too, ultimately put their faith in something, even if they don’t believe that thing to be a god. Personally, I think whatever we put our ultimate faith in is our god.
We tend to get hung up when we talk about religion for a couple reasons: 1) the major religions have thousands of years of tradition and dogma, which when overemphasized can lead to rigidity and therefore division; 2) the major religions have thousands of years of history, some of it less than inspiring; so the religions tend to come with baggage. And yet: most of the major religions believe in some version of the Golden Rule. And most believe in some version of the Holy Spirit (the idea that some invisible but accessible force permeates all creation goes by the name of Chi, Buddha Nature, Atman Brahmin, and consciousness). Point being: the major religions of the world have more in common than in difference, at least regarding the big questions. And the point of religion is not to demonstrate our tribal identity, but to become aware of ourselves, and to maximize our gifts by living in connection to the Infinite.
I am so very curious to see where religion and science go from here. I think we’re going to break down the barriers between science and religion. And I think we’re going to see the world’s religions converge somewhat, as we all learn to help individuals connect with the Infinite. From a Christian perspective I think this will resemble a Third Covenant with God; whereas the First Covenant (the Old Testament) was with God, and the Second (the New Testament) was with Jesus, I think the Third will be with the Holy Spirit.
You can be the judge of how I did in terms of predictions. But hopefully this grounding helps you navigate the evolutions in science and spirituality you witness during your lifetimes.
I love you,
Dad
Letters to Leland 