A proof of Palamite Panentheism, Idealism, and Acosmism

[Vico]

…

To be consistent: for His [psychical construct] children to interact through [via psychical constructs]. So the psychical constructs are His creations.

 

[Acosmic-Otaku]

To be consistent: for His [psychical construct] children to interact through [via psychical constructs]. So the psychical constructs are His creations.

Yes, the psychical constructs are his creations, sustained by his energies, contained in whole within his triune mind, but not sharing in his essence.

Although souls aren’t spatially extended and have individual consciousness, whereas “matter” is itself non-conscious and spatially extended.

I hope this clears up the confusion, and I do admit, looking back at the original argument that it needs a desperate revision. Which is fine because I actually enjoy making syllogisms, since even if they fail I can still learn something from it.

Once again, when I get the chance too, I’ll speak with the deacon just to double check I’ve not wandered into heresy territory though.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

To be consistent: for His [psychical construct] children to interact through [via psychical constructs]. So the psychical constructs are His creations.

Yes, the psychical constructs are his creations, sustained by his energies, contained in whole within his triune mind, but not sharing in his essence.

Although souls aren’t spatially extended and have individual consciousness, whereas “matter” is itself non-conscious and spatially extended.

I hope this clears up the confusion, and I do admit, looking back at the original argument that it needs a desperate revision. Which is fine because I actually enjoy making syllogisms, since even if they fail I can still learn something from it.

Once again, when I get the chance too, I’ll speak with the deacon just to double check I’ve not wandered into heresy territory though.

The Holy Trinity transcends His creation and the creation is ex nihilo. Does that conflict with “contained in whole within his triune mind, but not sharing in his essence”?

 

[mkoopman]

Despite a direct denial of predurantism this may be the closest fit. Actually, as you, Vico, appear to be keenly aware from my reading of your posts, the Soviet era RAS (Russian as opposed to Royal, British) academy generally made much more direct use of conclusions from scientific and especially particle physics rather than to use dereliction of langauge to imply a lesser understanding. The Chinese Catholics appeal to Bonaventure for the whole world man (with women priests, no doubt) and drop hints of the Dirichlet problem in metricity of gravitons; or, more general Acta Physica B concepts to indicate the reader is a dense particle.
Psychical constructs in reference to God’s mind imply The Holy Spirit does work, or is not truly transcendent, in sustaining existence, the universe.
I submit it implies the Chineses Communist Party in applying the Northern European forms of language manipulation derived for successful commercial advertising - yes, Noam Chomskian dredges, while deriding the same will overcome all the other coercive “demi-gods” formed by the union of alike thinking minds.
That is, the communist party will become the universal God.
Hard to admit, but at this point I almost miss the old Russian Academy communists. The Chinese Party form are a really bad habit.
Please note, thirty days to recall.
Maybe I should have joined the club even if they would have me as a member?

And, good luck on that Sino-(Soviet) border.

 

[JuanFlorencio]

My position is that the Universe (really all universes in the off chance of a multiverse) is within the mind of God. All physical structures (particles, gauge fields, spacetime geometries, bodies, etc) are psychical constructs, like objects in a dream. Similarly I hold that all minds are nested within the mind of God, and are completely distinct and independent from God with their own wills and unified centers of subjectivity. That all platonic objects, such as numbers, sets, moral values and duties, forms, and logical absolutes also arise from the mind of God. Finally, that the physical and the mental are just two different aspects of one fundamental ontic substance (dual-aspect monism).

When you say that everything arise from “the mind” of God, do you mean that the universe is a thought of God? Do you think there is a distinction between God and His “thoughts”, in such a way that He can reflect on His “primary thoughts”, so to say, giving place to even other universes? Is God changing as He thinks the universe?

Also, even conceding that the physical and the mental are two different aspects of one fundamental substance, I think you have to accept that they are so different that one deserves to be called material and the other immaterial. But you have not presented a good argument to show the plausibility of your claim.