7. An Emerging Metaphysical Macroparadigm Shift from Being to Energy-Being

Transcription

1 7. An Emerging Metaphysical Macroparadigm Shift from Being to Energy-Being 1. INTRODUCTION Apparently, there has been a gradual metaphysical macroparadigm shift in the history of Western philosophy, i.e., from the idea of being to that of energy-being. If it is so, countless people in the world would be involved in this shift in one way or another. Taking it seriously, this exploratory paper attempts, therefore, to (a) briefly introduce metaphysics and energy; (b) offer a short historical sketch of metaphysics as a theory of everything; (c) point out energy or energy-being as an emerging universal paradigm in the current postmodern age; (d) explain succinctly the relevance of the hyphenated energy-being; and (c) draw a conclusion accordingly. 1.1 Introducing Metaphysics We should not be surprised that metaphysics is often misunderstood, abused, and ignored by many today, both within and outside the academic community (cf. Swiezawski 1995, pp ). Kant called a metaphysician a ghost-seer (ein Geister-seher) (Ibid., p. 35). A recent magazine reporter classified a hit film made out of the Bible, cyberpunk, and higher math as belonging to popular metaphysics (Ressner 1999, pp ). As a term with two meanings relevant to religion, metaphysics is, in the words of M. R. P. McGuire: (1) in the proper, philosophical sense, the study of being, its principles and causes; (2) in a transferred sense, an occult, esoteric or mental religious system, for example, Christian Science and similar doctrines of mental healing are often described as metaphysical (McGuire 1979, p. 2352) Metaphysics, seen as a plural term, is normally used as a singular noun. It represents medieval Latin metaphysica (neut. pl.), medieval Greek (ta) metaphysika (neut. pl.), an alteration of the older ta meta ta physika the (works) after the Physics, the title applied, at least from the 1 st Century A.D., to the 13 books of Aristotle dealing with questions of 157

2 first philosophy or ontology (Simpson and Weiner 1989, p. 678). To the scholastics, metaphysics is the science of the ultimate principles and properties of real beings (Bittle 1938, p. 10). While general metaphysics, or ontology, treats being in general (Ibid.), special metaphysics consists of three departments: cosmology treats of the material world; psychology, of the soul; theodicy, of God (Ibid.). In the scholastic sense, this paper belongs to the realm of general metaphysics or ontology. Since it is the science of ultimate reality as opposed to appearance metaphysics inquires into what exists, or what really exists; it studies the world as a whole and presents us with a theory of first principles (Wilshire 1992, p. 1). Here we are dealing with metaphysics in the Western mind whose general scope originates from and consists of the ancient Greek question of being, its principles and causes (cf. McQuire 1979, p. 2352; McLean 1967, p. 731), and being (Lat. ens, esse; Gr. to on, einai) may be defined as what is; that which exists; reality (McInerny 1967, p. 230). As everyone in the world is involved in this question or reality of being in one way or another, ever since the Greeks the same archaic theme (of what is and what lets it be) has been taken up on a general fashion in many ways and reformulated in countless particular expressions with reference to multifarious special concerns in history (cf. Sokolowski 1990, pp ). Universal as it is, metaphysics is, hence, one of the most difficult subjects to be defined clearly to the satisfaction of all parties (Livingstone 1997, p. 1077) and it is practically impossible to obtain a universal definition of what it means. Nonetheless, we have to see beyond classical metaphysics. After enduring a long anti-metaphysical period since the end of the Middle Ages (cf. Kreyche 1967, pp ), metaphysics now begins its renewal in confusion, pain, and pathos back towards its historical central position in philosophy (cf. Jubien 1996, pp ; Koch 1999, pp ). Metaphysicians are seriously searching for appropriate paradigms or terms in which to restate the question of being and to remind themselves and others of the ever-old issue that is always ever-new, the question that gives life to other inquiries or branches of knowledge (cf. Küng 1991; Sokolowski 1990, p. 716). According to Hegel, while metaphysics is not the whole of knowledge, it is the whole in knowledge (Meynell 1983, p. 361). Mieczyslaw A. Krapiec calls it the most general analogical theory of 158

3 analogical reality (Krapiec 1991, p. 1). Metaphysics is a succinct study of description of the totality of reality, of all that exists according to one s conviction. It deals straightaway with one s worldview (cf. Sire 1988, pp ). While a typical specialist today uses more and more words to describe less and less content, a metaphysician uses less and less words to describe more and more content. In other words, a metaphysician is a unifier and a mega-synthesizer who sums up more and more of the whole of reality with less and less verbiage. Further, in the pursuit of metaphysics, metaphysicians never discover or demonstrate anything which is really new or unknown. Its only purpose is to explicitate the implicit, to bring out the animating principle of every kind of knowledge (Coreth 1968, p. 44). In the words of Hugo Meynell: Practically everything about metaphysics is subject to vigorous philosophical dispute, including the question of what it is. But the philosophers traditionally regarded as metaphysicians have in common that they attempt to provide and justify an account of the most basic constituents of reality, and the manner in which these are related to one another (Meynell 1983, p. 361) One may say that a metaphysician offers us a theory of everything within the metaphysical system. The expression a theory of everything (TOE) so far has been largely used in modern physics for its ultimate theory of reality in the sensible realm. However, TOE can and should be used in metaphysics to include all reality in both the sensible and supersensible realms. When we employ specially chosen paradigm(s), universal(s) or category (categories) of things to help us organize or reorganize all that we know as a whole, metaphysics becomes a subject of knowledge complementary to the analytical in-depth studies within the various disciplines. The metaphysical, all-embracing synoptic approach to reality assists and completes the whole of our scientific, analytical, detailoriented approach to things. To use an analogy, while our analytical approach to knowledge deals with various particular trees and their roots, metaphysics helps us see the total forest and its ultimate cause in the one universal view (Hepburn 1969, p. 212). One doubtlessly needs to complement the other and so we need to welcome this synthetic approach to knowledge, especially in the present information age in which we deal with numerous pieces of information daily. Alvin Toffler comments: One 159

4 of the most highly developed skills in contemporary Western civilization is dissection: the split-up of problems into their smallest possible components. We are good at it. So good, we often forget to put the pieces back together again (Prigognine 1988, p. xi). Indeed, a metaphysician offers us certain paradigm(s) that he or she has adopted or worked out. Increasingly, each human being is considered as a metaphysical being by nature and his (or her) knowledge as metaphysical knowledge (cf. Coreth 1968, p. 44; Heidegger 1929, p. 41, Salaquarda 1992, pp ). Up-to-date categories or contemporary paradigms are, therefore, often sought by metaphysicians to help us accommodate all the new data and restructure the world in a unitary account of whatever occurs (Walsh 1966, p. 78). As a result, we may participate better in reality, in which everything is brought under a single explanatory scheme, clearly recognized and consciously applied (Ibid.). Today, scholars with a metaphysical inclination seem numerous, but most deal with reality only within their own specializations. In the current multicultural and pluralistic information age, there is a real need for us to do interdisciplinary study and all-comprehensive analysis of reality as whole, without any clear-cut boundaries or compartmentalizations. 1.2 Introducing the Concept of Energy Being ubiquitous yet impossible to define clearly as a universal term, energy is, among other descriptions, mc² and the elusive élan vital or life force (cf. Sharpe and Walgate 2002, pp ). At the present, there is no clear essence for the concept we call energy, but rather a family of resemblances crossing disciplinary boundaries (Ibid., p. 249). A universal paradigm of tremendous explanatory potential, energy signifies everywhere both the potentiality and actuality of change (Ibid). Energy is also characterized by its unceasing dynamism, vitality, activity, communication, radiation, and permeation. New discoveries and knowledge about energy constantly emerge and so, as we enter the third millennium, we have to look beyond energy for the unifying paradigm in physics and the foundation and the architecture of existence. This paradigm may provide new insights into our own relationship with the universe, the nature of time, and of existence. It will provide new inspiration to our generation of scientists, theologians, and philosophers, etc. 160

5 2. A METAPHYSICAL HISTORY OF THEORY OF EVERYTHING 2.1 Introduction Metaphysics can be defined as a general theory of everything as regards what really exists. It is thought out on the basis of the metaphysician s observation or conviction of what being is, in accordance with his (or her) premeditated metaphysical thought category (or categories) and/or unifying paradigm(s). In metaphysics, each and every aspect of reality, or even of unreality, is necessarily conceived as being, or defined in reference to being (Gilson 1938, p. 319). Apparently, according to the present author s observation, there has been a gradual metaphysical macroparadigm shift in the history of Western philosophy, i.e., from the idea of being to that of energy-being. The following overview endeavours to sketch the four historical stages of TOEs as regards the sensible and supersensible realms: the ancient Greek, the medieval Christian, the modern scientific, and the postmodern pluralistic. The current Western mind has built creatively upon these four stages, criticizing them, integrating them, negating them, amplifying them, disregarding them, embracing them, distancing itself from them yet, up to the present moment, never truly leaving any of them (Tarnas 1993, p. 72). G. F. Kreyche sums up the history of metaphysics in the West with the following words: The history of Western philosophy is one alternately marked by metaphysical and anti-metaphysical currents of thought. Looking back on this history, one can discern certain patterns. Each time metaphysics reached a new crest, there sets in a reaction against it typified by the movements known as skepticism, empiricism, and fideism. After the apex of metaphysics reached by Plato and Aristotle, scant progress was made in this area until the Middle Ages, when it was to flower once again. Then, toward the end of the Middle Ages, scholasticism became increasingly decadent, preparing the way for a new rejection of metaphysics in the modern epoch. This rejection has extended all the way into contemporary philosophy, and while its strength has dissipated, it continues as a strong movement. (Kreyche 1967, p. 731) Below, succinctly, we will take a deeper look into this history of 161

6 metaphysics with regards to metaphysics as a theory of everything. 2.2 The Ancient Greek Era: From Everything is Water to Everything is Being Ancient Greek philosophers were more or less open to reality in both the sensible and supersensible dimensions. They begin with natural philosophy and developed their TOEs towards a greater appreciation of the concept of being (cf. Friedlein 1984, pp ). Ancient Greek philosophy began in the so-called cosmological period with Thales who can be dated by the fact that he predicted an eclipse which, according to astronomers, occurred in the year 585 B.C. (Russell 1947, p. 25; cf. Friedlein 1984, p. 71). After this largely religious-scientific period, one encounters the anthropological period dominated by the absolute-truthseeking Socrates ( B.C.) and various relativistic Sophists such as Protagoras ( B.C.) and Gorgias ( B.C.). It is followed by the systematic period in which one witnesses the systematic genius of Plato ( B.C.) and Aristotle ( ) who regard everything real as being. The fourth or final period is characterized by its multifarious approach during the fourth and third centuries, B.C. The following is a highlight of the four philosophical periods in ancient Greece The Cosmological Period: Everything is Water, Air, Fire, Atom The URAMs and TOEs of the early thinkers in this era were influenced by their sensory-empirical observations as well as by their religious beliefs and intuitions of the universe per se. Much like Homer, Thales and his successors, Anximander and Anaximenes, perceived nature as intertwined with divinity. The self-animated primary substance, both material and divine, continued to change itself into numerous forms. To Thales, everything was made of water and the world was full of gods (Tarnas 1993, p. 19). To Anaximander, all things came from a boundless and ageless primal substance as it encompassed all the worlds (Russell 1961, p. 46). In Anaximenes TOE, humans are of the same nature as the divine universe and the mystical gods, who were also formed form air as the arch-principle of everything (Krapiec 1991, p. 57). Heraclitus believed fire to be the primordial element, out of which everything else had risen (Rusell 1961, p. 61). Subsequently, the rise of Ionian physics, Eleatic rationalism, and Democritean atomism gradually moved the stage 162

7 from traditional belief to human scientific speculation (cf. Tarnas 1993, pp ) The Anthropological Period: Everything is Measured by Human Reflection Both the Sophists and Socrates believed in the importance of human reflection about everything. While everything in here-and-now humanism is real to the relativistic Sophists, the paradoxical denouement of Socrates skeptical pursuit of truth was his final arrival at the conception, or vision, of the eternal Ideas absolute Good, Truth, Beauty, and the rest in contemplation of which he ended his long philosophical search and fulfilled it (Tarnas 1993, p. 37) The Systematic Period: Two Versions of Everything as Being The ancient Greeks at this stage followed their natural intellectual need to systematize whatever was real in their worldview. Two major systems appeared: one passionate, religious, mystical, otherworldly, the other cheerful, empirical, rationalistic, and interested in acquiring knowledge of a diversity of facts (Russell 1961, p. 41). Plato represents the first tendency noticeably and offers a transcendent metaphysics. Aristotle signifies the second tendency notably with an immanent metaphysics (Ibid.; cf. Hepburn 1969, pp ). While Plato s URAM and TOE identify being with the eternal and transcendent Forms, Aristotle makes being universally applicable in the temporary and immanent world of becoming (Norris 1987, p. 80) The Multifarious Period: Everything Remains Largely Being A multitude of philosophical thoughts developed in this period, but only four main schools blossomed with ethical-religious significance: the Stoics, the Epicureans, the Skeptics, and the Neo-Platonists (cf. Friedlein 1984, pp ). As a whole, the thinking of Plato and Aristotle generally overshadowed the development of metaphysics in this historically phase (Kreyche 1967, p. 731). 2.3 The Medieval Christian Era: The Establishment of Everything as Being by St. Thomas Metaphysics as the study of being was established in the Medieval 163

8 Christian period with the major syntheses of, for instance, St. Thomas Aquinas and John Duns Scotus. The greatest influence has been the work of St. Thomas. According to G. F. McLean: The history of metaphysics in the Middle Ages consists in the major developments made possible by this more penetrating appreciation of being and evoked by the elaboration of the resultant theologies. These developments were made first on a more Platonic basis by St. Augustine ( ) and his school through St. Bonaventure ( ), and then with an increasing addition of the Aristotelian systematization and realism by way of Arabian philosophy, culminating in the major syntheses of St. Thomas Aquinas (c ), John Duns Scotus (c ), and others. (McLean 1967, p. 729) Being can be used as a participle of the verb to be, e.g., everything is being (existing). Being can also be used as an abstract noun, e.g., everything is a being (existent). In the distinction between a thing s or being s essence (essentia) and existence (esse), as well as between its potential (potentia) and realization (actus), St. Thomas seems to be the only philosopher who satisfactorily established being (ens) as a thing (res), as a concrete abstract noun (cf. Swiezawski 1995, pp ). Except God the Subsistent Being Itself, everything, according to Thomas, whether sensible or supersensible, consists in potential and realization. This potential is not only a concept, but is also the real potential to become something, which is not yet in realization. Potentia and actus unite in each thing or being. The theology of potential and realization explains what resides in realty, in a being or thing (cf. Ibid., pp ). 2.4 The Modern Scientific Era: Everything is Energy-Being in the Physical world The modern scientific, anti-metaphysical or anti-classical-metaphysics era can be divided roughly into four periods during which the macroparadigm shifts from seeing everything as being to everything as energy or energy-being in the physical realm The Beginning of Metaphysical Decline: Beings Are Not To Be Multiplied Without Necessity 164

9 Known as Ockham s razor, this principle was formulated by William of Ockham in reaction to increasingly petty and complex metaphysical distinctions, especially those of an earlier Franciscan, John Duns Scotus, the Subtle Doctor. With great influence, Ockham contributed to the decline of scholastic metaphysics (Kreyche 1967, p. 732). Accepting only the reality of singulars, he initiated the destruction of concrete universality (Gilson 1955, p. 492) with his subscription to strong elements of anti-metaphysical nominalism and skepticism The Rise of Natural Sciences: Everything Can No Longer be Being The natural empirical sciences have reigned supreme since the emergence of the Age of Science and Age of Reason (Earl and Brown 1964, p. 245) initiated by scientists like Nicholas Copernicus ( ), Johann Kepler ( ), Galileo Galilei ( ), Francis Bacon ( ) and Isaac Newton ( ) (cf. Russell 1947, pp ). Our sensory-empirical scientific experience has gradually become the ultimate measure of everything in both the sensible and supersensible realms. As scientifically verifiable sense data appear to be the only credible information, supersensible beings have lost their realism and appeal. Being is now considered too abstract, transcendent, non-empirical and irrelevant (Horvath 1993, p. 27) and this has seriously affected being as the acceptable universal unifying paradigm today (cf. Kuhn 1970) The Emergence of Modern Philosophy: Everything Is Measured by Empirical Science To grasp the history of modern philosophy requires examining philosophy s relationship with the rise and success of the natural sciences (Koch 1999, p. 123). The Critique of Pure Reason by Kant ( ), allegedly the most thorough and devastating of all anti-metaphysical works (Walsh 1966, p. 38), dismissed metaphysics as unscientific and unverifiable. However, Kant had derived such an idea from Leibniz s inferior successors that metaphysics is the science of things unseen and the knowledge of the supersensible. The founder of German idealism and probably the greatest of modern philosophers (Russell 1947, p. 677), Kant accepted no knowledge except through empirical sense-experience. He thought that Plato and his followers were misled in believing in the possibility of supersensible reality (Walsh 1966, p. 39). This Kantian metaphysical worldview has prevailed over the West in varying degrees 165

10 for the last two centuries. Its formidable influence can still be strongly felt in numerous campuses, schools, parliaments, offices, TV studios, homes, as well as seminaries and churches in the West The Advance of Modern Physics: Everything Is Energy-Being in the Physical World As classical metaphysics can no longer give us demonstrable truths about the world (Koch 1999, p. 126), many have taken refuge in the scientifically verifiable physical science as their only ultimate reality and meaning (cf. Schnädelbach 1984). Carl Sagan sums it up well: The Cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be (Sagan 1980, p. 4). What really exists is the physical cosmos, in which everything is physical mass, energy, mass-energy, energy-mass, mass-energy-being, or energy-being. 2.5 The Postmodern Pluralistic Era: Everything Sensible and Supersensible is Energy-Being The increasing influence of new-paradigm thinking in science, philosophy, and theology (cf. Capra, et al. 1991, pp. xi-xv; Lyotard 1984; Tilley 1995) may suggest that we live at the close of the modern scientific era or at the beginning of the post-modern pluralistic age. The West, in good faith, is opening its door to the idea and practice of pluralistic multiculturalism in line with the rest of the world. Further, the historical development of the two macroparadigms (being and energy-being) appears to parallel one another. The study of energy-being, in our projection, seems to progress through much the same stages mentioned above for the study of being: the cosmological period, the anthropological period, the systematic period, the multifarious period, and the mature period. While the development of the idea of being occurred within the ancient Greek and medieval Christian eras, the development of the idea of energy-being appears to be occurring during the modern scientific and postmodern pluralistic eras The Cosmological Period: Everything Is Energy-Being in the Physical Realm We are of the kind to reach the world of intelligence through the world of sense (Aquinas 1967, ; Soskice 1988, p. 173). Both the ideas of being and energy-being seem to begin with the cosmologies of their time. 166

11 While the idea of being was initiated by the cosmologies in ancient Greek physics, that of energy or energy-being originated in the cosmologies of modern high energy physics, More than we want to admit, writes Barbara Brennan, we are products of our Western scientific heritage. How we learned to think and many of our self-definitions are based on the same scientific models used by physicists to describe the physical universe (Brennan 1988, p. 21). The West, hence, has gone through a big historical cycle, from the old physics and cosmologies initiated by ancient Greece to the new physics and cosmologies of the present age The Anthropological Period: Every Human Experience of Energy-Being Counts Most postmodern minds in today s West believe that every human experience of energy-being counts. They are increasingly open to every major experience of energy or energy-being found in other cultures. From East Asian civilizations, for example, they have learned about various human and spiritual energies (cf. Chia 1983; Mann 1989; Moyers and Eisenberg 1995; Redfield 1997). From Eastern Orthodox experience, they have acquired knowledge of Divine Energy or Energies (cf. Cheng 1998; Lossky 1976; Maloney 1978; Meyendorff 1974, 1984; Ware 1975, 1977). The reality of these non-physical energies, in fact, has been present in both Eastern observers for as long as two millennia. Some Westerners, however, find it difficult to appreciate the traditional Orthodox understanding of Divine Energy and the East Asian concept of human and spiritual energies. This occurs due to at least four characteristics of the West, related to the now better understood phenomenon of the observer himself or herself influencing the nature of what seems to be observed: (1) Its traditional cultural unfamiliarity with these non-physical energies; (2) Its inevitable skepticism towards other cultural wisdom and experiences in relation to these energies; (3) Its modern, rational, and advanced knowledge of physical energy has become a real hindrance in the development of its intuitive, mystical understanding of these non-physical energies (cf. Marcoulesco 1987); (4) Its traditional language problem. On the relation between East Asia and the West, Bertrand Russell commented: I think contact between East and West is likely to be fruitful 167

12 to both parties. They may learn from us the indispensable minimum of practical efficiency, and we may learn from them something of that contemplative wisdom (Russell 1961, p. 554). Regarding Eastern and Western Christian traditions, John-Paul II said: The Church must breathe with her two lungs (John-Paul II 1995, p. 319; cf. Fahey 1996, p. 49; Geanakoplos 1966; Guillet 1947). In other words, this period is saying that every human experience of being as energy or energy-being counts and should not, hence, be dismissed without any serious consideration or reflection The Systematic Period: Initial Studies of Everything as Energy or Energy-Being Some postmodern minds have launched into a systematic period where they consider everything largely as energy or energy-being. For example, in The Phenomenon of Man (cf. Teilhard de Chardin 1982, pp ) and Activation of Energy (cf. Teilhard de Chardin 1970), the pioneer Teilhard de Chardin systematically described the totality of reality in various spiritual, human, and physical energy terms. In The Celestine Vision: Living the new spiritual awareness (cf. Redfield 1997), Redfield weaved together a TOE according to New Age belief (cf. Friedrich 1987), including different spiritual, human, and physical energy terms. Similarly, the author, in his work Energy and Environment: The spiritual-humanmaterial nexus (cf. Cheng 1993), put together a Christian TOE using a variety of these energy terms (for a brief comparison of the works of Redfield and Cheng, consult the next chapter of this book, pp ) The Multifarious Period: Numerous TOEs in Various Energy Terms Similar to the journey of being, various scholars in the future may collaborate in a systematic synthesis that considers the ethical-religious significance of everything as energy or energy-being. A large number of philosophies and theologies of energies could be developed that regard everything largely as energy or energy-being. A few major schools of energy or energy-being, however, would dominate and overshadow such an overall expansion The Mature Period in the Study of Energy-Being This period could be compared to the mature Medieval Christian study of being. Having accumulated a wealth of energy-based experiences, 168

13 URAMs, and TOEs, some great future thinkers will finally establish certain megasyntheses in their study and development of energy or energy-being. Therefore, the advancement of energy or energy-being as a metaphysical macro-paradigm will continue until its inevitable decline in the far future. In this way, the fresh beginning of the 3 rd metaphysical cycle would follow. 3. FURTHER HIGHLIGHTS AND ELABORATION ON ENERGY- BEING 3.1 A Brief Historical Outline of the Term Energy Many people think only of energy s physical dimension when they hear the term, not knowing that it has gone through various stages of meaning in history. Here we list the four historical stages, similar to the four historical stages of metaphysics aforementioned The Ancient Greek Era The term energy etymologically derived from the Greek energeia, a composite of en (meaning in, at, or with ) and ergon (meaning work ). Already implicit in the Aristotelian dynamics of force (cf. Phys. 250a 1-34), the concept of energy was used by Aristotle to denote actuality, or actual existence, or the actualization of what previously existed only potentially (Phys 191b 28, 255a 35) (Jammer 1967, p. 343). At this early stage, energy was more or less identical with force at work The Medieval Christian Era Max Jammer described the Medieval Christian era s history of energy with these compact words: Against the background of such Aristotelian concepts, St. Thomas Aquinas considered the possibility of a finite yet invariable moving force (vis infatigabilis), independent and separated from a constantly restorative supply. This notion was of importance for the subsequent conception of the universe as a clockwork mechanism that would not need perpetual transfusion of energy to keep the machine running. It was however only in the early 14 th century that the nominalist Peter Aureoli distinguished 169

14 explicitly between two different aspects of force, viz, a velocitydetermining factor and a capacitative factor for duration or extent (In 1 sent. 43.2). This distinction may rightfully be regarded as the first ontological differentiation between force and energy. (Jammer 1967, pp ) Here, at this stage, the distinct notion of energy slowly emerged from the previous Greek concept of force The Modern Scientific Era Modern science s usage of energy to do work builds on the motion-quantizing mechanical theories of Galileo, Newton, Descartes, Leibniz, and so on, and dates from Jan. 26, 1717, when John Bernoulli [in a letter to Pierre Varignon] used the term energy in the sense of virtual work (Jammer 1967, p. 343). T. Young invoked the idea of energy in 1845 to denote what is now called actual, kinetic, or motive energy, i.e., the power of doing work possessed by a moving body by virtue of its motion (Simpson and Weiner 1989, p. 240). It was later extended to include potential, static or latent energy, or energy of position, i.e., the power of doing work possessed by a body in virtue of the stresses which result from its position relatively to other bodies (Ibid.). Einstein helped establish the principle in high energy physics whereby mass and energy are equivalent. Subsequent investigation showed that the entire mass of a particle could be transformed into radiation energy (Jammer 1967, p. 345) The Postmodern Pluralistic Era One may call the 20 th century the century god-like physical energy. The scientific touchstones of the modern age quantum physics, mass production, the Bomb, space travel, electronics, the computer and the information wars all bear its imprint (cf. Gleick 1999, p. 49; Toffler 1990, pp ). This one-sided development of human nature, however, can destroy the environment [and] create nuclear annihilation (Naisbitt and Aburdene 1990, p. 321). Feeling betrayed by the god (physical energy) of the modern scientific era, many have consciously and subconsciously revolted against this age and helped inaugurate the postmodern pluralistic era (cf. Griffin et al, 1989). Continuous transactions between East and West, North and South, have created increasing pluralism in everything including the idea of 170

15 energy. At the beginning of the third millennium, people in the West are not abandoning physical energy, but are learning more and more abut human energy (cf. Brennan 1988; Hoffman 1983) and spiritual energy (cf. Friedrich 1987; Teilhard de Chardin 1982, p. 67) with a view to a healthier balance. 3.2 A Brief Philosophical Analysis of the Composite Energy-Being Being and the process of energy are present universally. Everything is energy or energy-being in the postmodern pluralistic universe physically, humanly, and spiritually. Although the idea of energy can stand by itself, the concept of energy-being seems more able to survive the scrutiny by the world at large. Accordingly, the hyphen between energy and being allows energy to deepen, enrich, energize, enliven, and advance our conception of being. Five hyphens, therefore, are possible A Qualifying Hyphen However abstract and transcendent, everything is still being as an existent, for there is nothing outside being. Energy functions in energy-being as a quality or qualifying adjective of being. In fact, an energy-being is a being that tends to share certain radioactive properties or qualities of physical energy, such as: (1) radiating energy (or part of itself); (2) penetrating other energies or energy-beings with the energy it radiates; and (3) absorbing other emitted energies as a partly open and partly closed energy system (cf. Capra 1979, pp ; Eisberg and Resnick 1985; Romer 1976, pp ; Wolfson and Pasachoff 1987, pp ; Zukav 1986, pp ) A Nominalist Hyphen Some people in the West are not ready for the emerging postmodern worldview. They do not understand the teaching of modern physics (on physical energy), Eastern Asian mysticism (on human and spiritual energies) or the Eastern Orthodox mystical tradition (on Divine Energy). 171

16 These people interpret energy-being in the nominalist sense. The word energy functions, for them, principally as an abstract adjective, a figure of speech. Energy becomes energylike in energy-being A Symmetric Hyphen Those who are attracted to both classical metaphysics and the postmodern pluralistic worldview prefer to use the hyphen symmetrically. Not only can it used for non-living entities like a particle and energy per se, but also for living beings, describing a human as a human (personal) energy or a human (personal) being. It make more sense, however, to describe a human as a human (personal) energy-being, because a human being is filled with energies and does not seem to cease radiating his or her energies (cf. Teilhard de Chardin 1969, pp ). Similarly, as God the Divine Energy is full of Divine Energies and does not cease radiating these Energies (cf. Krivocheine 1986, pp ), it seems more appropriate to describe God as a Divine (Personal) Energy-Being, rather than simply as a Divine (Personal) Energy or a Divine (Personal) Being A Balancing Hyphen Since the notion of energy appeared, physicists have divined into two camps: (1) realists who try to measure energy meticulously and ontologize it with a conserved property as a substance or an independent entity (McMullin 1967, pp ); and (2) conventionalists try to de-ontologize it as a complex, constructed concept whose justification must be found in an evaluation of the entire conceptual network of which it is an integral part (Ibid., p. 348) The battle is not over, but the balancing hyphen accommodates those who look at energy-being in both ways, i.e., bridging the realists and conventionalists A Processive Hyphen The progress of science in the 20 th century has strengthened the conventionalist (Ibid). Everything is a process rather than an object (Capra 1979, p. 301). Many high energy physicists believe that there is 172

17 no room for any fixed fundamental entity (Ibid., p. 308) because we live in a universe where all forms are fluid and ever-changing (Ibid.). The processive hyphen helps us understand that everything in the cosmos is an energy dance, ever changing in processive stages Is Everything Really Energy-Being? An abstract conceptual non-energy being does not exist. All apparent non-energy-beings (for instance, a thought, an imagination, a dream, a Greek mythological figure, a mathematical formula, an adjective, or an abstract noun), in some way, relate to energy-being at least as an abstract conceptual being, with or without a foundation in some energy-being. Apparently, every abstract conceptual non-energy-being exists as a conceptual psychic energy or energy-being, a real presence of energy within the mind. Inscribed on paper or stored away in a computer disk, it is a form of physical energy or energy-being. In the final analysis, everything is energy or energy-being. There is no ontological or de-ontological absolute non-energy-being anywhere in the universe unrelated to one or more energy-beings. A being or existent is either a substantial or processive energy-being, or a conceptual mental or psychic energy-being in the physical, human, or spiritual realms. 4. CONCLUSION Using certain universal paradigmatic terms, we have introduced the importance of metaphysics as a general study of being or theory of everything, based on the metaphysician s observation of being or conviction of what really exists. The history of metaphysics was also sketched in four historical periods: the ancient Greek, the medieval Christian, the modern scientific, and the current postmodern pluralistic. From this history, we pointed out that: (1) energy or energy-being is a universal unifying macroparadigm emerging from the modern scientific age; and (2) everything is energy or energy-being according to the postmodern pluralistic age. 173

18 The current generation is immersed in physical energy, but is learning about other energies from other cultural experiences; for instance, from Eastern Orthodoxy s view of Divine Energy and East Asian views of human and spiritual energies (cf. Mann 1989). Energy may not mean the same to a contemporary physicist, a typical Hindu or Chinese, and an Eastern Church Father. However, they all perceive their object as a form of radiant, permeating, and processive energy, energylike being, or energy-being in the respective physical, human, and spiritual realms. Everything created or uncreated, whether discovered by a human observer or not is or was energy or energy-being. This postmodern perception of energy-being as dynamic, processive, radiating, and permeating differs from the traditional Western conception of being as static, non-processive, non-radiating, and non-permeating. The problems with the rather sensate, rational, or yang West (Capra 1979, p. 324) have been more so due to the observer than the objects themselves. Apparently, a typical Westerner has inherited obstacles to understanding spiritual and human energies. Whereas Freud and Jung (cf. Jung 1981, pp. 3-66) began talking about non-physical energies not too ago, experiences of non-physical energies are a few millennia old according to the intuitive, mystical, or yin Eastern observer (Ibid., p. 325). We will, hopefully, continue to be open to each other and overcome these historical, cultural, developmental, and linguistic problems in the third millennium. The term energy-being has developed from being. It is better than the revolutionary term energy because energy-being is more evolutionary and can preserve our almost three-thousand-year philosophical tradition of being. Besides, energy-being helps us relate better to processive reality and participate more deeply in its dynamic foundation. We face a great challenge at the end of this millennium to move from the phenomenon to foundation, writes John-Paul II, a step as necessary as it is urgent (John-Paul II 1999, p. 47). At the same time, we need a philosophy of genuine metaphysical range, capable, that is, of transcending empirical data in order to attain something absolute, ultimate and foundational in its search for truth (Ibid.). Hopefully, developing energy-being as a metaphysical macroparadigm would help us move in that direction. The anti-metaphysics attitude, still present, has much to do with the subtle and obsolete thought categories of classical metaphysics (cf. Edel 174

19 1975, pp ), emphases on scientism, and the Kantian oversight of our human and spiritual intuition, etc. (cf. Marcoulesco 1987). Anti-metaphysical philosophy is an anti-classical, anti-mystical, or anti-speculative metaphysics, propounding that ultimately there are only sense-data (Hepburn 1969, p. 213). However, even avowedly antispeculative philosophers have implied ontologies (Ibid.). It becomes increasingly clear, states G. F. Kreyche, that metaphysics, like a phoenix, continually rises out of its own ashes, for even antimetaphysics itself constitutes a metaphysics (Kreyche 1967, p. 734). Finally, if everything is indeed energy or energy-being, more and more people will be thinking of everything in terms of energy or energy-being. Many already do this, but within their own fields: physicists describe things in terms of physical energy, Eastern Orthodox mystical writers in terms of Divine Energy, and East Asian sages in terms of human energy. However, some unifiers, like Teilhard de Chardin, James Redfield, and the present author, have begun to describe things in terms of the energy or energy-being found in various fields; the spiritual, the human, and the physical. REFERENCES Aquinas, T Summa Theologiae, vol. 3, 1a, New York: Blackfriars with McGraw-Hill. Bittle, C. N The Domain of Being. Ontology. Milwaukee: Bruce. Brennan, B. A Hands of Light. A guide to healing through the human energy field. New York: Bantam. Capra, F [1975]. The Tao of Physics. An exploration of the parallels between modern physics and Eastern mysticism. London: Fontana The Turning Point. Science, society, and the Rising Culture. New York: Bantam. Capra, F.; Steindl-Rast, D.; and Matus T Belonging to the Universe. Explorations on the frontiers of science and spirituality. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco. Cheng, J Energy and Environment: The spiritual-human-material nexus. New York: Edwin Mellen. 175

20 1998. The Distinction between God s Essence and Energy: Gregory Palamas idea of Ultimate Reality and Meaning. Ultimate Reality and Meaning 21: Chia, M Awaken Healing Energy through the Tao. The Taoist secret of circulating internal power. New York: Aurora. Coreth, E Metaphysics. New York: Herder and Herder, Earl, D. W. L. and Brown, J. R Roots of the Present. Toronto: Pitman. Edel, A Aristotle s Categories and the Nature of Categorial Theory. The Review of Metaphysics 29: Eisberg, R. and Resnick, R Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei, and Particles. 2 nd edn. New York: Wiley. Fahey, M. A Orthodox and Catholic Sister Churches, East is west and west is east. Milwaukee: Marquette University. Friedlein, C Geschichte der Philosophie. Lehr- and lernbuch. Berlin: Schmidt. Friedrich, O New Age Harmonies. A strange mix of spirituality and superstition is sweeping across the country. Time 7 December, Geanakoplos, D. J Byzantine East and Latin West. Two worlds of Christendom in Middle Ages and Renaissance. Oxford: Blackwell. Gilson, É History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages. New York: Random The Unity of Philosophical Experience. London: Sheed & Ward. Gleick, J Albert Einstein. Time 29 March, Griffin, R. D.; Beardslee W. A.; and Holland J Varieties of Postmodern Theology. Albany, New York: State University of New York. Guillet, J Les Exegeses d Alexandrie et d Antioche. Conflit ou malentendu? Recherches de Science Religieuse 34: Heidegger, M, Was ist Metaphysics? Frankfurt: Klostermann. Hepburn, R. W Metaphysics. A Dictionary of Christian Theology. A. Richardson, ed., London: SCM: Horvath, T Eternity and Eternal Life. Speculative theology and science in discourse. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University. Jammer, M Energy. Historical development. New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 5, W. McDonald, ed. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America,

21 John-Paul II, Pope Ut unum sint. That all may be one. The Pope Speaks 40: Fides et ratio. Faith and reason. The Pope Speaks 44:1-63. Jubien, M Metaphysics. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Supplement. D. M. Borchert, ed., London: Collier-Macmillan: Jung, C. G The Collected Works of C. G. Jung, 2 nd edn., Bollingen Series 20, vol. 8, R. F. C. Hull, transl. Princeton: Princeton University. Koch, R Metaphysical Crises and the Postmodern Condition. International Philosophical Quarterly 34: Krapiec, M.A Metaphysics. An outline of the history of being. New York: Lang. Kreyche, G. F Metaphysics, validity of. New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, W. McDonald, ed. New York: McGraw Hill: Krivocheine, B In the Light of Christ, Saint Symeon the new theologian ( ). Life-spirituality-doctrine. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir s Seminary. Küng, H [1989]. Paradigm Change in Theology: A proposal for discussion. Paradigm Change in Theology: A symposium for the future. H. Küng and D. Tracy, eds. New York: Crossroad: Kuhn, T. S The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2 nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago. Livingstone, E. A Metaphysics. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 3 rd edn., F. L. Cross, ed. Oxford: Oxford University. Lossky, V Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir Seminary. Lyotard, J.-F The Postmodern Condition: A report on knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Maloney, G. A A Theology of Uncreated Energies. Milwaukee: Marquette University. Mann, W. E Vital Energy and Health. Dr. Wilhelm Reich s revolutionary discoveries and supporting evidence. Toronto: Houslow. Marcoulesco, I Intuition. The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 7, M. Eliade, ed., London: Collier Macmillan:

22 McGuire, M. R. P Metaphysics. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Religion, vol. F-N, P. K. Meagher, T.C. O Brien, and C.M. Aherne, eds. Washington: Corpus; McInerny, R. M Being. New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 2, W. McDonald, ed., New York: McGraw Hill: McLean, G. F Metaphysics. New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, W. McDonald, ed., New York: McGraw Hill: McMullin, E., Energy: Philosophical analysis. New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 5, W. McDonald, ed., New York: McGraw Hill, Meyenforff, J A Study of Gregory Palamas. London: Faith Palamas (Grégoire). Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, vol. 12, Beauchesne, ed., Paris: Beauchesne. Meynell, H Metaphysics. A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, A. Richardson and J. Bowden, eds., London: SCM: Moyers, B., and Eisenberg, D The Mystery of Chi. Healing and the Mind. Bill Moyers Series, B. S. Flowers, ed., London: Doubleday. Naisbitt, J., and Aburdene P Megatrends Ten new directions for the 1990s. New York: Avon. Norris, R. A Ontology. The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 11, M. Eliade, ed., London: Collier Macmillan: Prigogine, I., and Stengers, I Order out of Chaos. Man s new dialogue with nature. London: Bantam. Redfield, J The Celestine Vision. New York: Warner. Ressner, J Popular Metaphysics. Time 19 April: Romer, R. H Energy. An introduction to physics. San Francisco: Freeman. Russell, B History of Western Philosophy. London: Allen & Unwin Chinese and Western Civilization Contrasted. The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russell. New York: Simon & Schuster: Sagan, C Cosmos. New York: Random House. Salaquarda, J Metaphysik III. Theologisch Realenzyklopädie, vol. 22, G. Müller, ed., Berlin: de Gruyter: Sharpe, K., and Walgate, J The Ultimate Reality of Energy as a Unifying Paradigm in the New Millennium: The Elusive Élan Vital, 178

23 Ultimate Reality and Meaning, vol. 25, no. 4, December: Sire, J. W The Universe Next Door, 2 nd edn. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity. Simpson J. A., and Weiner E. S. C., eds Metaphysics. The Oxford English Dictionary, 2 nd edn., vol. 9, Oxford: Clarendon: 678. Sololowski, R The Question of Being. Review of Metaphysics 43: Soskice, J Knowledge and Experience in Science and Religion. Can We be Realists? Physics, Philosophy and Theology: A Common question for understanding. R. J. Russell, W. R. Stoeger, and G. V. Coyne, eds., Vatican City State: Vatican Observatory: Swiezawski, S., St. Thomas Revisited. New York: Lang. Tarnas, R The Passion of the Western Mind. Understanding the ideas that have shaped our world view. New York: Ballantine. Teilhard de Chardin, P [1962]. Human Energy. London: Collins [1963]. Activation of Energy. London: Collins [1955]. The Phenomenon of Man. Glasgow: Collins. Tilley, T. W., et al Postmodern Theologies: The challenge of religious diversity. Maryknoll: New York: Orbis. Toffler, A Power Shift, Knowledge, Wealth, and Violence at the Edge of the 21 st Century. New York: Bantam. Walsh, W. H Metaphysics. London: Hutchinson. Ware, K God Hidden and Revealed: The apophatic way and the essence-energies distinction. Eastern Churches Review 7: The Debate about Palamas. Eastern Churches Review 9: Wilshire, B. W Metaphysics. The New Encyclopedia of Britannica, MACROPAEDIA, vol. 24. R. McHenry, General Editor., London: Encyclopedia Britannica: Wolfson, R. and Pasachoff, J. M Physics. Boston: Little Brown. Zukav, G The Dancing Wu Li Masters. An overview of the new physics. New York: Bantam. * * * * * * * 179