Is that it? Is that what ultimate reality is – a quantum vacuum? But then I began to think – this is the danger of rationalising, of using verbal symbols in order to try to understand and articulate reality. In the end we produce a formula, a collection of symbols which is a description – just that and nothing more. ‘Ultimate reality is a quantum vacuum’ is just as inadequate as ‘God is Trinity’. In a sense both are negative statements. Each expression says more about what ultimate reality, or God is not than what it is. What is needed is a language of experience.
Words are signs, signs invested with meaning. The signs are arbitrary. Dog, chien, perro all mean the same thing. We understand the signs because we have learnt what they mean through experience. We can use signs and symbolic reasoning to extend our knowledge. We may have experience of A+B and B+C but we may never have experienced A+C. However by the use of logical reasoning we can extrapolate from our knowledge of A,B and C to make a good guess at the results of A+C. All this is spelled out in Charles Tart’s essay ‘Hidden Shackles’ (Tart Charles T., Hidden Shackles: Implicit Assumptions that Limit Freedom of Action and Enquiry in Zollschan, Schumaker and Walsh eds., Exploring the Paranormal, Prism Press, Dorset,1989)
The problem lies a) in discussing reality beyond our experience, reality which we have not experienced and to which we give signs which are rooted in our experience but which may or may not be useful in describing this extra-experiential reality, and b) in discussing one’s subjective experience.
a) We can do the first 1) by the use of analogy and metaphor and 2) by the use of logic to manipulate these analogies and metaphors to make deductions. The problems with this approach are
• The appropriateness of the analogies and metaphors. ‘Father’ is not much use as a description of God to someone who has been abused as a child by his father. We must be very careful not to confuse the analogy with the analogue, the metaphor with the metaphrand.
• Hidden assumptions. Unless we are aware of these, and of the fact that to a great extent our perception is constructed, we are not going to get very far. We must be open to surprise.
• When all is said and done the deductions and conclusions are still only signs and symbols which may extend our thinking but do not extend our experience.
b) This is why it is so important if we are to communicate our subjective experience that our analogies and metaphors should be rooted in common experience and not in the intellect or intellectual conceits.