The Infinite Intimate: Cosmic Eros, Sacred Story, and the Anthro-Ontology of Value

In this conversation with

Marc Gafni

and Zak Stein, I began by asking about philosophy’s relevance in our current moment of crisis: What role can philosophy play? As philosophers, we like to engage in dialogue, but our present world seems very far from dialogue being what guides the decisions that are shaping the immediate future. I invited us to consider how we can feel like what we’re doing here is meaningful when we’re facing this type of rivalrous, revenge-based antagonism.

Regarding my use of “as if” language in my review of First Principles and First Values that Marc questioned, I explained that the “as if” is an invitation to my readers rather than a direct statement of my own position. It is intended as a bridge to the dominant culture, as a pragmatic invitation to see how people’s lives might change if they took these ideas seriously. I shared my grounding in process philosophy and particularly C. S. Peirce’s pragmaticist approach to theologizing: When I use terms like “as if,” it’s really just my way of signaling the participatory nature of truth and the reality of value. It’s not just waiting out there for us to find it. We have to become worthy of it. I emphasized that we need to imaginally body forth truth, goodness, and beauty to maintain them as realities. That’s our crucial role as human beings.

I asked whether consciousness being fundamental implies that the human being is not just the product of an evolutionary process but something more like the very medium of evolution’s expression. I brought in Schelling’s insight that “the human soul is conscientious of creation”—that we’re tapping into our own memory when doing evolutionary cosmology, not just abstractly reconstructing the universe’s exterior development. The intimacy paradigm Marc and Zak are proposing is something like a poetic proof of the existence of God as that than which nothing more intimate can be felt, a phenomenological proof of the existence of the divine ground within and between us. This divine ground, ultimately, is relational, and thus personal.