Moving On V, (Atoms and Things)

The inability to unify empiricism and rationalism by Kant stopped the work of many philosophers. The field of philosophy remained in the background until the 1920 discovery of independent linguistics, who said that empirical data are primarily symbolic. This discovery meant that the same symbol could have different meanings. This discovery did not affect the field of physics because this field carefully defined physical qualities using standards based on natural phenomena. However, after Kant, Friedrich Hegel began to develop philosophy into a science.

Kant reviewed Leibniz’s work. Of interest to Kant were Leibniz’s monads and Monadology. In addition to them, I also had interest in Leibniz’s ‘universal characteristics’ and the indivisible triangle in his infinitesimal calculus. Kant said that a monad must have an inner nature, which is free from outer relations. He thus concluded that a monad cannot be a composite thing. So, Kant viewed a monad as a simple thing and placed it in the Anthesis of his Second Antinomy. I disagree with Kant’s placement, even though Leibniz says that monads have no windows through which anything could come in or go out.

I say that a monad is both simple and composite. So, I use Leibniz’s monads in my book and speak of them as spiritual atoms. The monads are independent things, are immortal, and have essential qualities. They unify and become lawful composites. These composite things form the ever-changing and no- ending universe of God. Since, no spiritual atom is ever free, reincarnation is real.

Ever since my book was published and logicians challenged my scientific proof of God, I tried to convince them that some opposing ideas can coexist. Thus, I argue that either/or logic can lead only to one-sided thoughts, a pure world of physical and nonliving things, the rejection of metaphysics, and the rejection of God. I argue that both/and logic are a reality in our developing minds and give us new knowledge and understandings of life. I use the both/and logic in my scientific proof of God. This logic unified the opposites, infinite and finite, and unifies an infinite God with all created finite things. When the subject of our mind is life, I say to logicians that non sequiturs are illusions.