The Meaning: The Synthesis Perspective
Written by Dr. Nash Popovic
If we cannot find a convincing explanation for the origin and fine tuning of our universe for life within it, we may as well give up being like that chick inside an egg and acknowledge the possibility that there is reality outside it.
In fact, some scientists have already come to the conclusion that reducing everything to the world of matter is inadequate and that reality stretches beyond the physical. This is implied, for example, in Bohm’s theory of ‘implicate order’ and earlier, in De Broglie’s model. The latter proposed that reality is built in levels of size and organisation, each level containing its own causal and statistical laws. As already mentioned, some implications of Hawking’s theory (such as the notion of imaginary time) also point in this direction. After all, even multiple universes, that is an alternative to a meaningful universe, would likely require a reality in which they pop into existence, particularly if they are created independently from each other.
This view is also supported by universal (in the sense that they appear in practically all cultures) transpersonal experiences of a greater whole within which the material world is embedded. Although such glimpses may be fleeting and difficult to interpret, they seem to lie at the root of all religions, even non-theistic ones. The ubiquitous nature of this belief cannot be fully explained by utilitarian motives such as the alleviation of fears or increasing the sense of control. It is hard to reduce a widespread human urge to explore the realm beyond immediate sensory experience to nothing more but a psychological defence mechanism. There are other far more effective ways of serving those purposes, and yet they have not rendered beliefs in supra-reality redundant. Claims that there is nothing beyond, that humans live in a meaningless self-sufficient bubble, have never taken hold for long. It would be unwise to deny the possibility that at least some related experiences are genuine and correspond to something existent. This, of course, does not mean that their various interpretations are valid, but the core of these interpretations should not be summarily dismissed.
The above indicates that if the methodological and ideological limitations that constrain scientific and spiritual approaches are overcome, there is no insurmountable conflict between them. They both postulate that reality goes beyond the familiar one that consists of very dense and relatively slow energy (the matter) and is governed by physical laws. In other words, physical reality and its laws can be considered a special case, a subset of a larger framework (as Newtonian physics is