PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That has been a great difficulty as attempts are made to bring the increasing social problems facing today's world under control. It is generally believed those problems cannot be solved. Attempts are made to solve those problems, but success is not honestly expected. The true nature of the problems is not understood, and the attempted solutions are usually stereotyped and traditional. The attempts themselves are often as harmful as the problems they are purported to remedy.
TINNY: I believe those attempting to solve the world's problems, while impotent, are truly well meaning.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: How shall we move from the way things are in human society at present to the knowledge and actions which can really have an affect on the many and varied problems facing humanity?
TINNY: Most would be surprised at how close humanity is to the solution. There are throughout the world a growing number of groups and individuals who have seen through the veil of ignorance to view the common reality of existence. Those beings of emergent consciousness are the social pioneers who will open new paths so that many others may have an easier journey. As these islands of new consciousness emerge from the stagnant sea of old ideas they will join together to launch humanity into a higher level of existence. The new ideas will overwhelm the wrong contained within the old not by power or force, but by positive influence and attractiveness. To beings whose essential nature is good there is an inherent attractiveness in all that is true and right.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You are one of those islands of new consciousness. What are you going to do to help put an end to the passing era of force and aggression, and bring about the new age of peace and love?
TINNY: In general I will do two things. First I will try to live my life in true accord with natural law, and second I will share my knowledge with as many others as possible.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: In general that sounds good, but what will you do specifically?
TINNY: I don't know yet. As I come to a more full understanding of truth I will gain inner-direction, which I shall follow faithfully. Is there anything you could advise me to do.?
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Continue your search for truth. Only then will you fulfill your destiny.
TINNY: I want nothing but to be of benefit to humanity.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You have been.
TINNY: I have done nothing yet.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You have thought great truths. In doing so you have provided the energy which shall result in the expansion of the envelope of consciousness which encircles our planet; that sphere of consciousness, in a great quantum leap, shall transcend all terrestrial boundaries becoming one with the universe.
TINNY: Will that be the end of human progression?
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Even that sublime state of consciousness is only the beginning.
TINNY: When does the progression of consciousness end?
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: There is no end, progression is forever.
TINNY: If the purpose of physical existence is to become perfected in every aspect, must not all goals be attained?
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: The purpose is not so much to attain the goals but to make the journey,
TINNY: Even so, perfection in every aspect does exist. Perfect and absolute consciousness exists.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You are right. Although perfection is a goal to be forever approached but never reached, it does exist.
TINNY: All truth is paradoxical.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Only when observed from the material plane.
TINNY: That's right, there are no paradoxes beyond that which is physical.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: While we are discussing truth there are a few questions I would like to ask about that subject. With virtually every topic we discuss there seems to be different answers depending on whether we are speaking from the perspective of the material plane, or from beyond the material plane. In each case you assert that both views are the truth, but the two views often seem to contradict each other. You say that is because truth on the material plane is paradoxical. When I hear something called truth I want to be able to depend on that truth. How can I resolve that dilemma?
TINNY: Truth is the way we may know reality. The difficulty in understanding comes about because we are involved with reality at two levels. Our physical form and our physical senses interact with the material plane of existence. On the material plane everything is relative. It is the essential nature of the material plane to be expressed in a relative manner. Reality on the material plane is relative. To beings who perceive and exist on the material plane that relative reality is truth, it really exists and is no illusion. Truth within that relative reality is in accord with the essential nature of the material plane.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You say that relative reality is no illusion, but philosophers for thousands of years have claimed that it is illusion.
TINNY: This is where the seeming paradoxes come into every question. Philosophers who claimed our material existence is an illusion are correct, but they are only correct from the perspective beyond the material plane. While it has been known that there is existence beyond the material plane, it has not often been realised that language and concepts developed on the material plane cannot fully or correctly express the essential nature of existence beyond the material plane.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Should different words be used?
TINNY: The difficulty is not in the words, but exists in the thought symbols connected with those words. It will aid our understanding of the true nature of all existence to continue using words from the material plane to describe that which is non-material until we have new words and concepts which can more accurately describe reality beyond the material plane of existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Were you saying physical existence is real and true, not illusion, according to the nature of the material plane? Is it right for us as material beings to accept the truth of our reality, even though it is relative?
TINNY: That's it exactly. Nothing is taken away from the reality of our material existence because it is relative. All being relative means is that physical existence is changing and temporary; to be relative does not mean to be less real.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: And what of absolute reality?
TINNY: Our relative reality is an aspect of the absolute reality. Absolute reality is existence perfected in every aspect. It is the perfect and absolute manifestation of all that is good. It is unchanging and permanent. If we were to describe the absolute reality with words and concepts from the material plane we would say absolute existence has always been and will always be; but, since there is no direct correlation between those words and the essential nature of absolute reality even such a description is bound to mislead.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is absolute reality more real than relative reality?
TINNY: They are equally real.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You say they are equally real even though relative reality is temporary and absolute reality is forever.
TINNY: The two realities are of a different essential nature. To ask such a question is similar to asking which is more real, a snowflake or a mountain.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is it possible to know the true nature of absolute reality?
TINNY: Not while existing bound to the material plane. One must be of the absolute reality to perfectly know the absolute reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is it possible to know the true nature of relative reality?
TINNY: Not from existence on the material plane, only from beyond the material plane. We on the material plane may only know the true nature of relative reality as probability, not surety.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is there any way to know, however imperfectly, absolute reality from the material plane?
TINNY: The more perfectly the true nature of relative reality is known the closer one is to knowing the true nature of absolute reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If the true nature of relative reality was perfectly known would the true nature of absolute reality be perfectly known?
TINNY: Yes, but be careful that answer doesn't mislead you.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: In every communication it is important to know what the words really mean, not what they appear to mean.
TINNY: Just like any observation of the physical existence, the true message is always present but not always perceived.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You say relative reality can only be known as a probability, not as a certainty. What does that mean?
TINNY: It is the nature of existence on the material plane to be restricted from the perfect expression of any characteristic. One of the characteristics of existence on the material plane is knowledge. Perfect knowledge cannot exist on the material plane. Since the characteristic of knowledge is manifested, but constrained to expression less than perfect, our progression takes the path of knowledge increasingly approaching but never reaching perfection. The concept of probability is related to the degree of likelihood of anything being manifested. A probability of one (1.0) indicates absolute likelihood, which does not occur on the material plane, but likelihood as indicated by probability can approach the perfect likelihood of one (1.0), with no limits.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If the probability of anything becomes immeasurably close to one (1.0) might not we treat that likelihood as if it was perfectly likely?
TINNY: We had better if we want to survive on the material plane. When perfect knowledge is not available we must often treat the best knowledge available as if it were absolutely true. If we had no knowledge of the nature of existence we would have no idea of right action, and would blunder into all sorts of trouble. It is probably the critical importance of that strategy as life envolves which has resulted in us, at our present level of conscious development, so often believing that which is highly probably to be absolutely true.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you have an example?
TINNY: I think most people would claim it was absolutely true that a lead weight released from the top of a high building would fall to the ground.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Are you saying it wouldn't fall to the ground?
TINNY: I'm saying that even something which seems as certain as the effect of gravity on a lead weight can only be known as a probability. It is less than absolutely true that a lead weight will fall to the ground.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: I assume there are no tricks to the meaning of your statement. There is no hypothetical string attached to the lead weight.
TINNY: No tricks at all. It is not a certainty that a lead weight when released will fall to the ground.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: I know of no instance where a lead weight, given those circumstances, has done anything but fall to the ground.
TINNY: Obviously a lead weight is very likely to fall to the ground. In fact the probability would be so close to one (1.0), meaning it is so close to a certainty, that if a billion people each dropped a lead weight a billion times a year for a billion years there would be virtually no chance of observing the lead weight do anything but fall.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is that just a theoretical idea or is there some imaginable situation which could result in a lead weight doing something besides falling?
TINNY: There is a very real possibility of extremely slight probability.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Would you tell me what it is?
TINNY: It has to do with the quantum nature of the subatomic particles which make up the lead atoms. Our past discussions have touched on how it could happen, but the details aren't important to this part of our discussion. What is more important is that due to the quantum effect there is a basic uncertainty inherent in all aspects of physical existence. Because of that uncertainty the most unlikely thing could happen, and the most likely thing may not happen.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Should we then remain uncertain about everything?
TINNY: We should. It would be intellectually dishonest to be certain when the evidence tells us that is something we can never truly be. I should emphasise, though, that this uncertainty is often to remain philosophical rather than practical.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What do you mean by that?
TINNY: While it is always good to realise that our knowledge of anything is uncertain, we still have to live in the material world. To succeed in everyday life we must act as if many of the things we know really are certain, even if we know in truth they are not. We must act in accord with that which is of highest probability.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: An example of what you are saying would help.
TINNY: I will give you another example about gravity. If I was standing on the edge of a high cliff I might think about the time I said a lead weight when released is not certain to fall to the ground. If it is true for a lead weight it should be true for me also, and it is. There is a possibility that if I were to step off the cliff I wouldn't fall. If I were to act on that possibility I would be a fool. Although it is true there is a possibility I won't fall, the probability is so great that I will fall that the only reasonable thing I can do is act as if that high probability is a certainty. If I didn't treat high probability as certainty I might die.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Would that generally be a good way for us to view our interaction with the environment?
TINNY: Until our knowledge of the true nature of reality is much better than at present it is the only way which can allow us to survive. In many cases right action would not be so obvious as when deciding whether or not to step off a high cliff. Since it is necessary for our continued progression to act in accord with the natural order, and we can only know right action as probability, it is important for us to learn to distinguish well and accurately that which is most likely to be truth. If we make one too large error we may cease to survive. If we make too many small errors we may also cease to survive.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you think most people are able to judge probabilities well enough?
TINNY: No I don't. At present the human race as a whole is so close to species suicide that it is clear that far too many wrong judgments are being made.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You seem to be stressing the importance of probabilities over possibilities. Does the concept of possibilities have importance to us also?
TINNY: In the physical universe, with the exception of quantum limitations, just as nothing is absolutely certain to be, nothing is absolutely certain not to be. All that exists is on a continuum of relative expression. It would be correct to say that within the scope of physical existence virtually everything is possible; therefore, the concept of possibility becomes meaningless on the material plane. In the absolute existence, just as all positive characteristics are perfectly and absolutely expressed, any characteristic which is not positive is not expressed, is indeed not possible.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What exceptions arise from quantum factors?
TINNY: Earlier we discussed the quantum limitations on the expression of material form. At all levels of material form the progressive development takes place not continuously, but through fixed units of change. A simple example was shown by the fact that as atoms become progressively more complex they increase by proton sized units. The hydrogen atom has one proton; the helium atom has two protons and so on. There can be no atoms with any number of protons which is more than one and less than two. The number of physical forms which can be manifested is immense, but the number of physical forms that cannot be manifested is greater. Those physical forms which can be manifested are then possible, while those physical forms which cannot be manifested are not possible. The concept of probability includes only those aspects of physical existence which are consistent with quantum limitations. From our point of view all existence on the material plane is subject to the concept of probability.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is there any harm if possibilities are considered in addition to the assessing of probability?
TINNY: The danger is in being blinded to the true nature of existence. While probabilities give some direction to our search for truth, possibilities, being most often meaningless, can be harmful if we attribute meaning to them. I have heard in arguments, where two competing points of view were being proposed, the holder of the position of much lower probability say, apparently thinking this somehow settles the argument, ''well, isn't what I say possible?''; to which the holder of the position of higher probability must answer ''yes it is'', since virtually all things are possible. It is a false reliance on possibility to use it to add weight to an argument when in fact it adds no new information. It is merely a trick of human thought and communication to protect a position held. Put directly into words, what is really being said is logically false and very obviously so. It is saying that since all things are possible all things are equally probable. No one using that device would want to own up to using such faulty logic, but that is the essence of the tactic.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Why would anyone resort to such a foolish tactic?
TINNY: To win an argument, to avoid being beaten in a contest of ideas, to protect their views against the incursions of objective information. For lots of reasons, but none of them good ones. They all stand in the way of the search for truth.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Sometimes the human race seems quite foolish.
TINNY: We humans as a species are like a child growing up; we make mistakes, sometimes suffer from those mistakes, but hopefully go on to progress beyond them to a successful, happy maturity.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Don't you have anything bad to say about humanity?
TINNY: Nothing at all. I am not unaware of the wrongs in human society, but I look at those wrongs objectively, without ill feeling toward those who do wrong, although I may hate the wrong acts. I love the human species, we are beautiful. We deserve to be nurtured with tenderness and cherished.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Shouldn't those who do evil be punished?
TINNY: There are good arguments why no one should ever be punished. Punishment is a barbaric act, one which by its very nature must bring more evil than good.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That is a remarkable thing to say. You will have to explain more about that idea later.
TINNY: Good, because I have a lot to say about the matter.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: I'm sure you do. Let's finish talking about possibilities and probabilities right now.
TINNY: Well, what I've been trying to say is that possibilities have often been considered to be more important than probabilities, and that has been hindering our search for truth and standing in the way of the further progression of the human species. We must learn how to more accurately assess and better use probabilities to successfully achieve our ultimate destiny. All of science is really about discovering probabilities. The methods of science would be a good addition to the everyday tactics we each develop to come to know the world around us. What has been called science should not be the exclusive domain of a few scientists, but should be available to and used by us all.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Does that mean we should all become scientists?
TINNY: It does, just as we all should become philosophers. To best achieve success in our search for truth we should seek to express all different aspects of our human potential.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Would it help to express even our artistic potential in this search for truth?
TINNY: The artist in each of us has much to offer. Unfortunately just as we are so often blind to the reality of that which exists outside ourselves, we are also often blind to the potential locked away within ourselves.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Does each of us have within ourselves the potential to be a scientist, a philosopher, and an artist?
TINNY: There is no human being without that potential.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: It sounds as if all our efforts should be directed toward the search for truth.
TINNY: In all that we do there exists the potential to better know truth. We do not necessarily have to direct our actions to the quest, but only to accept the knowledge of existence which comes freely available as a natural part of all human action and thought. The search for truth can become an integral part of our every endeavour.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Might not it become quite a burden to make so exhaustive a search for truth?
TINNY: I believe it could become more exciting and more fulfilling than any previous way of life.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you do that in your own life?
TINNY: I have since I can first remember.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Don't you ever get tired of searching for truth?
TINNY: I never have. Each day I seem to become more motivated to find truth. I treasure each new fact I discern from viewing the world around me or from insights within. I enjoy learning most fully.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Don't you find some things you learn more interesting than others?
TINNY: Of course I do. Even so I desire to know even the least interesting of new information.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Why is that?
TINNY: The reason gets back to the unity of all things. Every bit of information is linked in some way to every other bit of information. Even the most seemingly meaningless fact may provide the link needed to travel to new heights of knowledge. Sometimes I have been studying in one field of knowledge and all of a sudden I have an insight in what appears to be a totally unrelated area.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Would you say it was true that the more you learn about any one subject the more you will know about all other subjects?
TINNY: I have always found it that way. For instance I have noticed that if I read a book on physics, next read a book on biology, then read the same book on physics again I understand things in the physics book I didn't understand the first time. The interconnection between physics and biology, due to their inherent unity, allows me to better understand both subjects.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is there a name for that process of learning where knowledge of any one subject provides information which allows better knowledge of all other subjects?
TINNY: This method of learning is based on a system called multi-dimensional logic.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Would you give a brief explanation of multi-dimensional logic?
TINNY: The system of thinking based on multi-dimensional logic derives its effectiveness from the unified nature of all existence. In describing that logic system I will be using a three dimensional model. I must do that for the same reason I had to describe the shape of the physical universe as a three dimensional torus, a doughnut shape. The essential nature of existence, the toroidal shape of the universe, and this new system of thinking all have higher dimensional aspects beyond the three dimensional world. Unfortunately, with a language which does not yet contain words and concepts to adequately describe that which transcends the three dimensions, I can not give true descriptions of the fullness of multi-dimensional reality.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Your efforts to provide descriptions of multi-dimensional reality in words and concepts of three dimensional existence have been most helpful. We must always accept our limitations. Those limitations are only temporary. Please go ahead with the explanation of multi-dimensional logic.
TINNY: In three dimensional terms this new logic system can be fairly easily described. Thinking has envolved just as all other things have envolved. The simplest logical system of thinking we use to acquire knowledge can be thought of as having no dimensions. If we see a familiar object we do not require a sequence of thoughts to identify the object. The fact that it is perceived gives it identity. The next and more widely used logical system of thinking can be thought of as having one dimension. This could be called linear logic. In that system of thinking we progress to knowledge by a sequential series of bits of information, facts which form a line leading to a conclusion. Linear logic works fine if the all points on the line, representing necessary facts are available, but if there is information missing the sequential series is broken and a conclusion cannot be reached. A further logical system of thinking can be thought of as having two dimensions. In this system of thinking we progress to knowledge across a plane. In that case no particular missing bit of information along a line bars us from reaching a conclusion.
As we approach knowledge along any line we may move to the side, across the plane, if it becomes necessary to bypass any empty space on the original line of logical progression. The plane, though, being limited to two dimensions does not contain all knowledge, only that knowledge contained within a particular subject. An even higher logical system can be thought of as having three dimensions. In that system of thinking we progress to knowledge through the body of a sphere. In this case all facts are contained within the sphere, as bits of information, each occupying a different point among the infinitude of points which make up the body of the sphere. As we think within the system of three-dimensional logic we have access to the necessary information to reach any conclusion. The path may be winding, even wildly divergent, but from any point within the sphere it is possible to reach any other point. Gaps along any sequential series, line, or plane present no obstacle. Information lacking on any plane is freely available on other planes. A sphere contains not only an infinitude of points, but also an infinite number of lines and an infinite number of planes. When using three-dimensional logic to attain knowledge there are an infinite number of paths leading to every conclusion.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Are there no limits at all to what knowledge is available when using three-dimensional logic?
TINNY: Three-dimensional logic makes available all knowledge contained within the material plane of existence. To go beyond the material plane a new system of thinking must be used. That new system of thought is hyper-dimensional logic, which has no limits and has available all knowledge. Through hyper-dimensional logic knowledge of perfect and absolute truth can be achieved.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: We humans are three-dimensional beings existing on the material plane. How can we utilise a system of thinking which reaches beyond the physical existence?
TINNY: At the human level of consciousness our minds are constantly linked to existence beyond the material plane. Each of us has the potential to open the door of our mind, allowing access to perfect and absolute truth. Multi-dimensional logic, when fully expressed, does not lead to conclusions along lines, across planes, or through spheres; instead all knowledge is simultaneously and perfectly within the awareness of consciousness.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Our minds work in marvelous ways.
TINNY: We humans are very lucky to be able to know our minds in a way no other living thing on this planet can.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: We still have far to go in the progression toward our ultimate destiny. And you my child radiate as a beacon in the darkness. Your thoughts on the true nature of our existence have reached the pinnacle of human knowledge, a high peak never before scaled.
TINNY: I sound like a mountain climber.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: In a way you are. Soon others will make the same climb. Some will climb faster and some will climb higher. A path once opened becomes available to all. It won't be long until small children find your long journey into truth a simple stroll around the local neighbourhood.
TINNY: I can almost feel them pressing against my back.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Some will be beyond you the minute they hear your words.
TINNY: Sounds good to me.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you have no desire to remain first?
TINNY: My only desire is to express my potential to its fullest. I hope everyone else will be able to do the same. My measure of success is within myself, not in competition with anyone else.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Very good.
TINNY: Where do we go next in our discussion?
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: You have explained much about the nature of our existence. Much of what you say has a very high probability of being truth. I think the question which must now be answered is what does it all mean? If existence is as you describe it, what does that tell us which is important in our daily lives, to human society, and to the future of the human race?
TINNY: That is no small question.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Our discussion is far from over. First, tell me again, what is the purpose of life?
TINNY: To become perfect in every aspect.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Why?
TINNY: Such is the purpose of the whole physical existence. The universe exists so that matter may form increasingly complex arrangements, moving from a simple deterministic beginning to a perfect transcendental culmination.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That answer sounds like you are repeating what you read in a book.
TINNY: It does, doesn't it? I'm not sure why I say it that way; I never have read that answer anywhere.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: It is a correct answer, but its very objectivity takes away much of its emotional impact.
TINNY: I feel embarrassed to give the answer in more personal terms. The answer in terms of greater emotion and humanity is almost too incredible.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So you hide it behind scientific objectivity.
TINNY: Perhaps I did.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: There is nothing you cannot say to me. You may speak anyway you choose with complete acceptance.
(NOTE: Be very careful reading these next few paragraphs, I would not, of course, describe the process in the same words now. Muhammad al'Mahdi, 2004)
TINNY: I know what I want to say but it is not easy. The absolute reality, that which is beyond the material plane of existence, is perfectly manifested consciousness. One of the many aspects manifested by perfect and absolute existence is the expression of its own essential nature. The physical universe is that process of expression. The progressive development of matter is the process by which physical existence approaches the perfection of the absolute. The creation of the physical universe is like the moment of conception when new being begins. The period of material development from the moment of creation to the expression of self-reflective, human level consciousness, is like the period of gestation. The expression of self-reflective consciousness in the created human being is like the moment of birth.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Absolute existence is the creative parent of material form. The physical universe is like the womb.
TINNY: We are the created offspring of perfected being. We are the created children of God.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If we are the created children of God what will we be when we reach adulthood?
TINNY: We will be perfect in every aspect. We will be as gods.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you mean we will be God?
TINNY: No, I mean we will exhibit many of the characteristics of God; we will be godlike in our nature.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: I can understand why you were hesitant to say those words. Those are perhaps the most significant words ever to be spoken.
TINNY: It humbles me even to think such words.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Are you positive those words are true?
TINNY: As I explained, we can never at our present level of development perfectly know truth. We must assess probabilities as our best means to know truth. When I say we are the created children of God and that we shall be as gods I am expressing the truth of highest probability. This great truth was derived from an assessment of the knowledge available about the true nature of physical existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: I must clarify some issues of this understanding you present as to our relationship to God. It almost sounds like you are talking about a form of polytheism when you say we will become as gods.
TINNY: Oh no; I never meant anything like that at all. There is only one God. We are created in the image of God to carry out the Will of God. If we choose, through our free-will to fulfill our God given destiny, we have the potential to progress infinitely close to the full and perfect expression of the characteristics of God.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If we came infinitely close to expressing the characteristics of God wouldn't we then be virtually identical with God?
TINNY: That is true; in fact, from our present perspective we would then be virtually indistinguishable from God. Having said that I must also say that infinity is a very tricky concept. While we have been granted the potential to become infinitely close to the perfect expression of the characteristics of God, God at the same time always remains infinitely greater than us.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That is hard to comprehend.
TINNY: Yes, it is.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: The other main issue I wanted to clarify is about God being our parent.
TINNY: I believe I used the term 'creative parent' which can be understood somewhat differently. We are God's creation. We are created in the image of God. If, in our maturity, we fulfill our divinely granted potential we will become perfected as God is perfect. The relationship God has with us after our creation is loving, caring, and nurturing. This, in its fullness, is exactly the relationship of parent to child. It is a beautiful way to understand our relationship with God.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: To say we are the created children of God approaching a godlike existence is a remarkable claim. How do you know that to be the most probable truth of our existence?
TINNY: I didn't base the claim that we are the created offspring of perfected existence on any one fact, but on information from a number of different areas. The fact that information from each area leads to the same conclusion adds greatly to the assumption that this is truth of the highest probability.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What is the strongest evidence which tells you we are the created children of perfected existence?
TINNY: The evidence which I find most influential covers billions of years. It is the process of envolution itself. Matter has made continuous progression since the creation of the physical universe, and that developmental progression has gone from the simple subatomic particles to the human species. The direction of that progression has been constantly manifesting certain characteristics more and more perfectly. Because that trend has continued for so long it allows one to extrapolate, from the present, well into the future.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What does it mean to extrapolate?
TINNY: Extrapolate means to predict what is to come from what is already known.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Is that a very reliable method?
TINNY: If you know enough the predictions are highly reliable. For example, if I were to ask you to tell me which number comes next in the series after 2,4,6,8, you would most likely say the next number would be 10. When you make that prediction you have just used extrapolation to arrive at the answer. Based on the evidence given you could give no other reasonable answer.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: But you can't be sure that is the correct answer.
TINNY: I agree, you can't, but from the available evidence you can say without, a doubt that it is the most probable answer.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So you are using the same logical process, extrapolation, to arrive at your conclusion that perfected existence is our creative parent. Given billions of years of progressive material development, directed toward the more perfect expression of the characteristics of existence, we are logically obliged to assume that process will continue; and given enough time envolving physical form will achieve the perfected and absolute expression of all characteristics. We can't be positive such a conclusion is true; but we can be sure, given our present knowledge of the true nature of reality, that is the most probable conclusion.
TINNY: That is correct, but was only part of my reason for arriving at the conclusion I did. The more full reason is described by an old concept from biology; 'ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.'
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: It has a nice sound. What does it mean?
TINNY: Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny is a way of saying that the development of the individual goes through all the stages as did the development of the species. The development of the human embryo goes somewhat through all the stages of development as animal life did. The human embryo to some degree progresses from a one-celled beginning and goes through the multi-celled, fish, amphibian, reptile, and mammal stages before emerging as a fully developed human being.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Are you saying that as the human embryo develops it is at one point a fish, and at another point it is a reptile?
TINNY: The human embryo is never actually a fish, a reptile, or any of the other stages of animal development, but during the process of development the embryo shows similarities of structure to all the different stages of animal development. The idea that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny is most useful if understood generally, not specifically. If that concept is expanded from the human level of development to the level of perfected existence the totality of developmental progression, from light to subatomic particles, to atoms, to molecules, to biological life, to human life, recapitulates the stages of development of perfected being in the development of the physical universe.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: How does this tell you that we are the created children of God?
TINNY: I find that easier to discuss if instead of the word God we use the term absolute or perfected existence. Anyway if we look at how the progressive development of matter has unfolded we would not be surprised that the process has resulted in the existence of the human species. The human species is the next logical step of progression after the highest animal forms. Not only does the development of the individual allow the stages of the biological progression to be observed, but the stages of biological progression allow us to know the nature of the fully developed individual. At any level of development the characteristics of future levels could be predicted by extrapolation. As we already discussed, the most probable extrapolation from the human level is that the progressive development will continue until all characteristics of existence are perfectly manifested. One of the characteristics which every level of existence expresses is the ability to reproduce its own kind. This is done by repeating, recapitulating, all previous stages. It would be most probable that perfected existence also reproduces its own nature, and that this process involves a developmental progression including all previous stages. Those previous stages would progress from a simple deterministic beginning through to a perfect transcendental existence. The stages of the reproductive cycle of the nature of perfected existence would be expected to be identical with the stages of material development within the physical universe. It is this fact which I find to be the most compelling evidence that perfected existence is the creative parent of developing conscious existence within the physical universe.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: I must agree with you. I see no other more reasonable explanation to explain the nature of physical existence. Since the developmental process during reproduction is common to all previous levels of conscious existence we can only expect the same process will exist at all higher levels.
TINNY: Even if I had no more evidence than that one logical argument it would be sufficient to allow me to say we are the created offspring of perfected existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That one line of logical argument includes information from many fields of inquiry.
TINNY: Actually once the unified theory of existence is understood you come to see all evidence leads either directly or indirectly to that same conclusion.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you think it would be of any value to explain how that same truth can be known by evidence from other areas of knowledge?
TINNY: All knowledge is valuable but I think there would be more value right now in considering the implications of that conclusion. If we are truly the created offspring of God the implications of that most essential truth will reach every aspect of human life.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: How do you feel knowing you are an infant godlike being?
TINNY: It feels very natural since it is the most basic process of physical existence. To see myself as a godlike being in formation does, though, give me a great feeling of responsibility, and of urgency.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Why the urgency?
TINNY: Since the world is on the brink of destruction, and the human species on the brink of extinction, the urgency I feel is to ensure we do not destroy ourselves, and to help ensure that our grand destiny be fulfilled.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Things you say bring forth many questions.
TINNY: I'll try and answer them all.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If God is our creative parent would we be allowed to destroy ourselves?
TINNY: The development of any organism requires that a path in harmony with natural order be followed. During the early stages of physical development material existence has little choice but to follow the natural order. Since material existence is destined to perfectly and absolutely manifest all positive characteristics, and one of those characteristics is free-will, we must successfully nurture that aspect of our nature. That is the great hurdle which developing consciousness must conquer, not only on this planet but in the innumerable other places throughout the physical universe where high order consciousness has developed, is developing, and shall develop. At the stage of material development when self-reflective consciousness becomes manifested progress along the path to perfection is no longer mainly externally determined, but must be directed from within. We must use our newfound predominance of free-will over determinism to achieve perfect free-will. We cannot be forced to do so. Those who succeed in that quest must do so on their own. Those who do not succeed must be allowed to fail.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Do you mean that perfected existence would allow its created offspring to fail to reach maturity?
TINNY: Developing consciousness cannot reach maturity as perfected being without doing so by choice through the exercise of free-will. If the choice to progress is not consciously made and acted upon by the developing human line the species will be allowed to become extinct. That is the natural order.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Wouldn't perfected existence be able to reproduce its own nature without allowing some lines of developing consciousness to fail?
TINNY: No.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Isn't one of the characteristics of perfect and absolute existence omnipotence, meaning to be all powerful?
TINNY: That's true.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Then why couldn't perfected being reproduce its own nature in a manner such that every developing material form would succeed in perfectly manifesting all positive characteristics? Can't God do all things?
TINNY: To be omnipotent or all powerful has been misunderstood. It does not refer to the ability to do anything, but only to do all things which can be done. It is for that reason only positive characteristics can be manifested in the absolute existence. The negative cannot be manifested. Perfect and absolute existence could not commit the ultimately evil act and destroy itself. There is natural law at every level of existence, which must be adhered to. At the most simple physical level of existence, force is the reason natural law is followed. At the most perfect level of existence, choice by free-will is the reason natural law is followed.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: If that is so, couldn't perfected existence choose to violate natural law?
TINNY: Perfected existence cannot make such a choice and be perfect. Perfected existence follows natural law perfectly.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Where does that natural law come from? If perfected existence is absolute how can it be subject to natural law?
TINNY: Natural law is inherent in perfected existence. It is part of perfected existence. It is internal, since nothing is external to that which is absolute. Perfect and absolute existence is subject to nothing but its own essential nature.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Does that mean perfected existence makes natural law?
TINNY: It would be better to say that perfected existence is natural law. Natural law at the absolute level of existence cannot be changed.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: What about at the physical level of existence?
TINNY: Existence on the material plane is an aspect of perfected existence. At the physical level natural law is also determined by the essential nature of perfected existence. Because the physical level of existence is relative rather than absolute, natural law is relative rather than absolute.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Does this mean that natural law can change in the physical universe?
TINNY: I don't think so.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Aren't you sure?
TINNY: Unfortunately I can't answer all your questions.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: That's probably because you are less than perfect.
TINNY: Far less than perfect.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Perhaps not so far from perfect as you might think.
TINNY: Even if I can't say for sure whether or not natural law can change in the physical universe, I can say with a great deal of certainty that natural law will be followed less than perfectly at the material level of existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: There are limits to how far we may vary from natural law, aren't there?
TINNY: The further we are from natural law the greater the risk we will fail to survive. Any developing line of material form will cease to exist if it strays too far from the natural order.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Many forms of life which once existed are no longer around. Did they all stray too far from natural law?
TINNY: Perhaps we should use a different word than 'stray', because that word seems to put the responsibility for moving away from natural law on the particular form of material existence. Sometimes the material forms don't alter their ways at all, but remain unchanged as the environment alters. The effect is the same regardless of what causes the divergence. A sufficient degree of harmony must exist between the material form and natural law to allow continued existence.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: Maintaining that harmony seems to be very difficult for the human species. Why is that?
TINNY: Much of the difficulty is a result of the advanced level of development the human species has achieved. It is not easy to suddenly be the first required to choose by free-will to continue envolving. Another related problem is caused by the amount of power at the disposal of the human race. Never before on this planet has any life form had so great an ability to alter the environment. That power is so great we now have the ability to bring total destruction to our planet.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: The exercise of power is one of the characteristics which has been progressively developing, isn't it?
TINNY: That appears to be true. It is for that reason perfected existence is expected to be omnipotent. The greater the ability to exercise power, the greater the responsibility to use that power in a right manner.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: So you think humanity has come to possess that amount of power too quickly?
TINNY: Either that or we have been too slow to rise to the necessary level of responsibility.
PHILOSOPHER-SCIENTIST: We will have to do something soon or we won't even be around to discuss such matters.
TINNY: That is the urgency and responsibility I said I felt.
