Worlding with the Creal: Autonomous Intelligence and Philosophical Practice
Philosophical practice is guided by an ideal of autonomous intelligence: to think for oneself. But is a fully autonomous form of intelligence possible? Autonomy in thinking may be thought to be relative or absolute. First, one may imagine an asymptotic social process of self-ruling; in this case, to...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-12-01
|
| Series: | Religions |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/15/1/26 |
| _version_ | 1827371255553064960 |
|---|---|
| author | Luis de Miranda |
| author_facet | Luis de Miranda |
| author_sort | Luis de Miranda |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Philosophical practice is guided by an ideal of autonomous intelligence: to think for oneself. But is a fully autonomous form of intelligence possible? Autonomy in thinking may be thought to be relative or absolute. First, one may imagine an asymptotic social process of self-ruling; in this case, to become philosophically healthy would then mean to become <i>more</i> virtuous and <i>more</i> autonomous cognitively, <i>relative</i> to others or to a previous version of ourselves. But there seems to be a contradiction here, as autonomy seems to imply, by definition, completeness rather than comparison or relativity, the latter being seen as a form of dependence. Hence, a second stance, absolute rather than relative: the idea that some humans can achieve a perfect state of philosophical health, implying full autonomous intelligence. This hypothesis was historically thought to imply a state of <i>autarkia</i>, self-divinization, or <i>autotheosis</i>: being divine by one’s own effort. Many have forgotten that most ancient philosophers, chief among them Epicurus, Plato, and Aristotle, thought this likeness to a god (<i>homoiosis theoi</i>) to be the reward of <i>theoria</i>, a theoretical life. I argue that we can reconcile relative and absolute cognition by understanding autonomous intelligence to be a <i>cosmotheosis</i>: a becoming divine not as an act of singular separation, but by welcoming the multiversal reality that we already are, and partaking in the universal creative <i>worlding</i> process referred to here as “Creal”. In this sense, philosophical practice calls for a pantheistic form of religiosity; a shared cosmology that compossibilizes all intercreative entities. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-08T10:36:40Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b1ff9a48e17a46669081aa9ba6352cf7 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2077-1444 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-08T10:36:40Z |
| publishDate | 2023-12-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Religions |
| spelling | doaj.art-b1ff9a48e17a46669081aa9ba6352cf72024-01-26T18:14:39ZengMDPI AGReligions2077-14442023-12-011512610.3390/rel15010026Worlding with the Creal: Autonomous Intelligence and Philosophical PracticeLuis de Miranda0Turku Institute for Advanced Studies, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, FinlandPhilosophical practice is guided by an ideal of autonomous intelligence: to think for oneself. But is a fully autonomous form of intelligence possible? Autonomy in thinking may be thought to be relative or absolute. First, one may imagine an asymptotic social process of self-ruling; in this case, to become philosophically healthy would then mean to become <i>more</i> virtuous and <i>more</i> autonomous cognitively, <i>relative</i> to others or to a previous version of ourselves. But there seems to be a contradiction here, as autonomy seems to imply, by definition, completeness rather than comparison or relativity, the latter being seen as a form of dependence. Hence, a second stance, absolute rather than relative: the idea that some humans can achieve a perfect state of philosophical health, implying full autonomous intelligence. This hypothesis was historically thought to imply a state of <i>autarkia</i>, self-divinization, or <i>autotheosis</i>: being divine by one’s own effort. Many have forgotten that most ancient philosophers, chief among them Epicurus, Plato, and Aristotle, thought this likeness to a god (<i>homoiosis theoi</i>) to be the reward of <i>theoria</i>, a theoretical life. I argue that we can reconcile relative and absolute cognition by understanding autonomous intelligence to be a <i>cosmotheosis</i>: a becoming divine not as an act of singular separation, but by welcoming the multiversal reality that we already are, and partaking in the universal creative <i>worlding</i> process referred to here as “Creal”. In this sense, philosophical practice calls for a pantheistic form of religiosity; a shared cosmology that compossibilizes all intercreative entities.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/15/1/26autonomous intelligenceautotheosisphilosophical practicetheoriaphilosophical health |
| spellingShingle | Luis de Miranda Worlding with the Creal: Autonomous Intelligence and Philosophical Practice Religions autonomous intelligence autotheosis philosophical practice theoria philosophical health |
| title | Worlding with the Creal: Autonomous Intelligence and Philosophical Practice |
| title_full | Worlding with the Creal: Autonomous Intelligence and Philosophical Practice |
| title_fullStr | Worlding with the Creal: Autonomous Intelligence and Philosophical Practice |
| title_full_unstemmed | Worlding with the Creal: Autonomous Intelligence and Philosophical Practice |
| title_short | Worlding with the Creal: Autonomous Intelligence and Philosophical Practice |
| title_sort | worlding with the creal autonomous intelligence and philosophical practice |
| topic | autonomous intelligence autotheosis philosophical practice theoria philosophical health |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/15/1/26 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT luisdemiranda worldingwiththecrealautonomousintelligenceandphilosophicalpractice |