The Three Worlds of Reality

Modern Western civilization largely believes that all that exists is matter and its movements (energy), otherwise known as the physical world. Those who adhere to this view of reality are known as materialists, and while this view certainly gained prominence after The Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries, it is not at all a modern idea to the West, but rather, it dates back to at least the 5th century BC with Greek philosophers such as Leucippus and Democritus. But despite its current popularity and millennia's worth of development and refinement, the materialist view fails to account for all the phenomena we experience and observe in reality. So, the scientific method itself would dictate that since the hypothesis does not match the data, it should be revised, or abandoned. If we were to do so, we would rediscover another view which actually accounts for all the data—one which posits that not one world exists, but three.

The Paradox

While the physical world is seemingly the most apparent, that does not at all mean it is the only world which exists, as others can also be both logically deduced and experienced. The materialist view asserts that these other worlds are merely constructs of the human mind, byproducts of intelligence which itself is nothing more than sophisticated chemical and electrical interactions within the material organ of the brain. But if we can't trust the human mind's ability to perceive those worlds, why should we trust it to perceive the material world? If the mind is a product of irrational forces, how can we trust logic, or even our own senses? In the meaningless chaos of existence, the physical world could also be nothing more than our irrational imagination projecting an illusion.

This may sound rather absurd to those who put so much faith in science, materialism, and naturalism, but it is a well-trodden concept which has been proposed in religions such as Buddhism, philosophies such as solipsism, and even scientific fields such as quantum physics, as well as being portrayed in pop culture films like The Matrix. In materialist societies, we take the reliability and intelligibility of the physical world for granted, placing essentially religious faith in our own (or a scientist's) ability to correctly perceive and deduce the reality around us. But this itself is illogical as a materialist, as there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the human mind, itself just a random smattering of matter and energy which resulted from a process of blind chance, can be trusted to correctly perceive reality at all. As Plato once said, "Science is nothing but perception."

But incredibly, the physical world is intelligible. So, while a materialist would insist the mental world of thought, feelings, and consciousness is merely a product of the physical world, it has a hard time explaining how irrational forces and blind chance produced a rational universe with minds within it which just so happen to be able to both perceive it and understand it. The materialist has an even harder time explaining the rules of logic, which seem to exist independently of the individual human mind.

The Abstract World

But the problems for materialists only increase when you take into account the abstract world of numbers, sets, and ideas. Unlike physical objects, abstract objects exist outside of space-time, and therefore have no causal powers as they cannot directly affect or influence the physical world. But critically, that also means that neither can the physical world affect or influence the abstract world. This logically leads to the conclusion that the physical world cannot be the cause of the abstract world, and yet, the abstract world clearly exists.

Take for example, the reality of mathematics in the abstract world. These concepts, equations, numbers, and theorems exist independently of the human mind. We do not invent or imagine them, nor are they subjective to the human observer. Instead, we discover these external, independent, and objective truths. The intricacy, elegance, and precision of mathematics strongly suggests an origin of mind and intellect, and it aligns so perfectly with the physical world that it cannot be mere coincidence. Yet, it has no direct relationship to the physical world—it can only be perceived by mind. So, if objects in the abstract world aren’t a product of the physical world and aren’t a product of the human mind, then where, or in what mind, do they exist?

Plato and other Greek philosophers believed that reality's ultimate source was thought and intellect, not matter. As such, reality was constructed by a hierarchy of emanations, beginning with The One—the impersonal and immaterial source of all things—which emanated Nous, which was the divine mind of pure intellect. The Nous then emanated the World Soul, which was the collective energy in the universe. The World Soul then emanated the physical world, as well as individual souls. Within that framework, individual minds were actually part of a pre-existing mind, and therefore consciousness and the abstract world at least had a rational—if not entirely satisfying—explanation.

While Plato's philosophical concepts may sound quite foreign to your average Westerner today, the existence of consciousness and the abstract world has mystified scientists operating within a materialistic framework for so long, that metaphysical explanations are once again being explored. Several scientific theories have been proposed, but they all are variations of the idea that either intellect or information exist independently of the human mind and our consciousness taps into, receives, or is an extension of it.

Within Plato's framework, the human soul emanated from an eternal, pre-existing reality. This concept doesn't typically satisfy the materialist, however, as they want a naturalistic explanation because they believe it would allow for an eventual complete discovery and total explanation of each and every causal mechanism. To the materialist, acknowledging an eternal, pre-existing reality beyond the physical world is essentially a non-explanation as it is then outside of the reach of science to probe, explore, and evaluate. In other words, we can't test and confirm the explanation, therefore it is not a satisfactory explanation as it doesn't satiate the entirety of our curiosity. But of course, entirely naturalistic explanations are no better in this regard, so it's a bit of a red herring argument.

For example, the current naturalistic explanation of the physical world is the big bang theory, which posits that a singularity (an unfathomably dense and small sphere of matter) suddenly exploded, expanding that singularity into the entire universe of space, time, and matter. But while this explanation may allow for some scientific investigation, it does not at all provide an exhaustive explanation nor provide a scenario where every aspect of the theory can be tested and observed. It doesn't explain where the singularity came from, how it suddenly came into existence, how or why it then spontaneously exploded, where the energy to explode it came from, or even where and when the singularity could have existed prior to its explosion—which created space and time. Of course, even if all these questions could somehow be answered theoretically, virtually none of them could be tested and observed in a laboratory.

The Spiritual World

The fundamental and inescapable catch-22 problem with the big bang, is that if matter isn't eternal (an idea which the prior model, steady-state cosmology, had previously proposed), then it had a beginning, and if it had a beginning, then it had a cause, and the cause of space, time, and matter by definition must be spaceless, timeless, and immaterial. Furthermore, the cause must have mind, will, and agency in order to decide to cause the physical world to suddenly exist. In other words, the cause logically would be an omnipresent, omnipotent, and eternal being. This logical deduction then introduces the third world—the world where spiritual objects reside.

Materialists don't reject the spiritual world because it isn't logical—it is. They reject it because of their predetermined belief in naturalism, and some of them are quite open about their rather closed-minded conclusions and unwillingness to go where the evidence may lead. Richard Lewontin, a leading evolutionary geneticist at Harvard University, in his published review of a book by the famous astrophysicist Carl Sagan, put it rather bluntly when he said:

"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community of unsubstantiated 'just so' stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."

This should make it clear that a materialistic explanation is not a better, more logical, or more evidenced explanation, it is simply the preferred explanation, selected due to confirmation bias. So, while materialists will complain that the spiritual world allows for 'just so' explanations with little to no ability for scientific investigation, testability, or confirmation, the reality is, the same issue is also inherent to materialistic explanations—and they take no issue with it in that context.

Furthermore, our goal should be to discover the truth of how and why the physical world came to be, even if that answer is not entirely intellectually satisfying in terms of the exact mechanisms and processes. By acknowledging the spiritual world, we may have to admit a limited ability to perceive the precise questions of "how," but what is gained is far more profound and satisfying—answers to the vastly more important and universal human search of the "why."

Though an all-present, all-powerful, and eternal being is the most logical cause of the physical world, materialists will often argue that if the physical world must have a cause, then the spiritual world must also. In other words, God must have a cause, which in turn causes an infinite regression of causes. But this is a categorical error. Logic dictates that everything that has a beginning has a cause, but an eternal object has no beginning and no end, therefore it has no cause—it simply is.

A Divine Dimension

This was one of the convenient features of the steady-state cosmological model to materialists, in that it posited that the physical world was eternal, and therefore had no cause. But then the evidence began to pile up showing the physical world did have a beginning and therefore was not eternal, which led to steady-state cosmology eventually being abandoned and the big bang theory being adopted. This shift in cosmology was actually quite uncomfortable for materialists at first as it seemingly allowed "a Divine foot in the door."

But this cosmological shift certainly made our understanding of reality more logical. Because the idea that the physical world is eternal is rather illogical considering physical objects exist in space and time. But if the physical world had a cause, and that cause by definition had to be outside of space and time, then a pre-existent spiritual world would make perfect sense. That world must be inhabited by an eternal, non-physical object which occupies no space, exists outside of time, and has mind, will, and agency in order to decide to create the physical world. That makes the object not a what, but a who, and in order for that who to create the entire physical world—the totality of all matter and energy—that being must be all-powerful. So, the spiritual world does not simply require blind faith to believe in, it is a conclusion which can be logically arrived at. To reject it is actually quite illogical due to multiples lines of evidence as we shall see.

Plato's philosophical framework of emanations ultimately believed the eternal element of reality was pure intellect or mind, and therefore his paradigm called the eternal realm the mental world, which he differentiated from the abstract world. While these categories are a bit of a game of semantics, a better framework may be spiritual, abstract, and physical categories of worlds, in part because the Judeo-Christian God did not identify Himself as mind, but as spirit. This is evident from the opening verses of Genesis where the Spirit of God hovers over the waters of creation, to Jesus identifying God as spirit and instructing that therefore He must be worshipped in spirit and in truth.

But beyond the framework of the Judeo-Christian worldview, the abstract world simply cannot exist independently outside of mind, so both a mental and abstract world is redundant. However, we've already established that objects like mathematics which exist in the abstract world are universal truths which are not created, devised, or dependent upon human minds, which indicates they exist in a greater mind which is similar enough to our own that we can discover or perceive these truths. But while the mental and abstract may be virtually indistinguishable, spirit is categorically different. Unlike Plato's The One, spirit is both eternal and personal—embodying intellect, not just emanating it.

The God of the Bible isn't just mind or intellect—He has a will and emotions as well, making Him a person or a being, not just the undefined, disembodied, calculating mind of Plato's philosophy. It is this aspect which makes the God of the Bible rather unique among all world religions and philosophies as they typically describe their god or ultimate reality as being either infinite and eternal or personal. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob revealed Himself to humankind as both, with one of His primary attributes being love.

At this point, one may wonder what exactly defines the spiritual world, or what characteristics can be attributed to it. In English, the definition of the words soul and spirit are almost interchangeable, but in both Hebrew and Greek, there is a very clear distinction. In the Greek New Testament, the word used for soul is psuche, which is where we derive the English word psyche from. Soul therefore, can be understood as the mind, will, and emotions. The word used for spirit on the other hand is pneuma, which is where we derive the English word pneumatic from as pneuma literally means wind, breath, or air. Spirit therefore, can be understood as the substrate of reality which is necessary for life (and even matter) to exist which cannot be observed directly, but rather indirectly via its energy and effect.

By substrate, I mean the fundamental reality which both the abstract world and physical world exist within and are dependent upon—just as in the physical world, we exist within an atmosphere of air and are dependent upon it to live. Given this biblical analogy, consider that in the physical world, at the quantum level, all matter consists primarily of empty space, with particles suspended in an unknown medium—like dust in the wind.

…that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find him, though He is not far from each one of us; for in Him we live and move and exist… -Acts 17:27–28 (NASB) (emphasis added)

…all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. -Col 1:16–17 (NASB) (emphasis added)

Lines of Evidence

The word faith is often derided in materialist circles as meaning a blind or unevidenced belief. This strawman is then mocked and knocked down as the antithesis of rationality and reason. But the word faith in the Greek New Testament is pistis, which means persuasion, credence, or conviction and comes from the root word peitho, which means to convince by argument. So, there is nothing in the biblical usage of the word that would indicate that faith is baseless, unevidenced, unreasonable, or irrational. So, with this in mind, let us examine a few other lines of evidence for the spiritual world.

First, we must acknowledge a biological reality: humanity is hard-wired to believe in God. This universal truth has been studied and documented in books such as, "Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science & the Biology of Belief." Materialists argue that we have an innate belief in God because the concept of an external moral code was beneficial to humanity as a species, therefore evolutionary processes produced a brain with this instinct. But that is not at all how biological evolution operates as natural selection selects traits that are most advantageous for the individual organism's survival and reproduction, not the greater good of the species, society, or culture. Furthermore, there is no "moral gene" as morality, like mathematics, is an abstract object. It exists as a concept in the abstract world, not as a physical trait encoded in DNA.

So, why do we innately or instinctively believe in God and a higher reality? Perhaps we should look at other instinctual desires for clarity. We naturally hunger because there exists a reality called food which is necessary to satiate that hunger and sustain life. We naturally thirst because there exists a reality called water, which is necessary to quench that thirst and sustain life. We naturally have libido because there exists a reality called sexual reproduction which is necessary to fulfill that desire and sustain life. So, in the case of an innate understanding that there is a spiritual world and our deep and universal desire to connect with it, the logical conclusion is that there exists a reality called God who is necessary to fulfill that desire and who sustains life.

Beyond logical deduction however, there are more direct lines of evidence as well. Again, while we may not be able to directly observe wind, breath, or air, we can indirectly verify its existence via its effects. And there are countless testimonies from every era, culture, and generation of supernatural or spiritual encounters and experiences. Vast volumes have been written throughout history documenting these experiences, including in the modern age and even from a scientific perspective. From the pages of scripture, to the writings of Irenaeus, Augustine, and Aquinas, and more recently, books written by skeptic-turned-believer Lee Strobel.

The fact is, evidence of the spiritual and supernatural is not hard to find, but for the materialist, it is hard to accept. As such, this rejection of the spiritual world is not a confirmation of rationality, but a denial of reality. Any denial of reality has a tendency to have consequences and ramifications sooner or later, and they are typically both detrimental and existential. Hopefully Western civilization course corrects before it's too late.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man... They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. -Rom 1:18-23a, 25 (NASB)