Spirituality Unfiltered: Challenging Modern Philosophical Fads

Spirituality and Philosophy with Vervaeke and Pageau

Mark Lefebvre and Ignacio Di Biaggio had a discussion on Navigating Patterns about the ideas of John Vervaeke and Jonathan Pageau on spirituality and philosophy. It becomes clear that there was a big problem in how Pageau and Vervaeke communicated. They showed difficulty when explaining deep Christian ideas about God and reality using everyday language. This problem causes many misunderstandings in today’s talks about spirituality and philosophy.

One of the core frustrations discussed focused on how specific concepts are often used in an incorrect manner.

Ontology and the “Substance” Problem

We will begin by examining the modern critique of substance ontology, a term that is frequently misunderstood. Ontology isn’t just about categorizing things, as some modern scientific approaches suggest; it’s the deeper study or logic of being. It’s important to remember that classical thinkers like Aristotle or St. Thomas Aquinas never implied that substance ontology meant isolating entities. Instead, we can see that much of today’s scientific ontology attempts to categorize being purely through a materialist lens, which strips it of its true philosophical depth.

Defining Hierarchy

Hierarchy is another term that often gets thrown around without much clarity, leading to endless confusion. There’s a vast difference between a tangible, felt sense of hierarchy, like what one might experience within the Catholic Church, and the abstract, unexamined notions of the concept that proliferate in various discussions.

Symbolism – More Than Just a Sign

A critical point was the overly broad and vague use of symbols. When we use the term too loosely, it allows for almost any arbitrary combination of meanings. True symbolism must be rooted in the inherent nature and properties of things – for example, water truly symbolizes certain qualities, but it can never symbolize those of fire.

Where Does Reality Begin?

Next is challenging John Vervaeke’s idea of co-emergence, the notion that things somehow emerge from a community. This doesn’t make sense. True emergence originates from a foundational starting point and leadership, not from mutual co-creation. This is what is called the trap of middle-out thinking, which often ignores what came before. Contrasting this with the concept of emanation, which suggests that spirit or being descends from a higher source – God – to inform and shape reality. Notice that Jonathan Pageau sometimes uses Vervaeke’s generalized terms which can distort the picture of a more precise understanding.

The Linguistic Labyrinth: Nominalism and Its Pitfalls

A significant area of concern is nominalism, the belief that a name alone grants reality to a thing, effectively disregarding the conceptual realm that names are meant to represent. This creates a double bind: the mistaken idea that all reality is simply a collection of names, and conversely, that all names inherently exist in reality, leading to the invention of new names for concepts that already exist. There is immense value in dead languages like Latin, precisely because they preserve unchanging meanings, especially in theological contexts. Words are limited tools; they merely point to concepts, and it’s these concepts that allow us a more accurate grasp of reality.

God, Us, and What We Can Understand

Let’s highlight a key difference: God, the Creator, has no limits, but we, as His creation, are inherently limited. It’s a fundamental point.

When God created the world, He didn’t just put things together like we build something. It was a profound act of divine power; He created everything out of nothing. This is completely different from how we make things.

It’s crucial that our understanding of symbols and reality is firmly based on a clear Christian view of existence. This means our understanding is rooted in God. Finally, we humans have limits in fully grasping these higher spiritual ideas. This limitation shows why revelation is vital—it’s how God directly reveals truths we couldn’t discover on our own.

Strong Boundaries and Precise Definitions

As you look back at these discussions, you might realize how often contradictions and faulty thinking appear in some modern philosophical ideas. You might also become concerned about the dangers of letting ideas become too flexible without clear rules, which can make important differences vanish. Because of this, it becomes clear that we need strong boundaries and exact definitions in all serious conversations. Only by being so careful can we truly understand and connect with deep truths.