That they don't understand that they have accepted falsehoods as a basis for their beliefs is WHY they are mistaken. These are avoidable mistakes. Creationists aren't correct in their little imagined truth, they are wrong according to what facts reveals about reality.
They are mistaken in trying to take a mythic-level view of reality and creation, and attempt to make it a mental or scientific-level view of reality. You are correct. Creationism is false science. I completely agree.
But what you have yet to show you understand what I am talking about is, that a view that God is the underlying truth of reality itself, from a mythic-level reality, is itself a mythic-level truth. It's not a scientific truth, but it is a mythic-level truth. "Creationism" is distorted theological view pretending to be science. I've said it multiple times, and will say it again, it's both bad science and bad faith. It's a confusion.
We know they think they understand something and that they believe they are correct, it is that they are NOT correct that is important. Maybe not to you, but it is to those who actually value understanding what is true.
They are not correct to me either, if they are trying to claim
Creationism is valid science, or that it negates everything that science has to say about how the world was created. Creationism is not simply believing God created everything, but is a specific form of theology that pretends to be science.
However, that does not mean they are wrong that there is an Ultimate Reality out of which all of creation comes into being. That's not anything that science can either affirm or deny. But Creationism, cleary can and should be denied. It's a pseudoscience.
No, their thinking is sloppy. You can't have sound reasoning and false conclusions. If you have sound reasoning you have sound conclusions, and that requires following the rules of logic with the intention to understand what is true. You mention larger frameworks but don't give examples, nor explain how they aid reasoning and sound conclusions.
I have multiple times explained the different stages or levels or structures of consciousness. I showed how that this is all academically supported, nothing I made up, nor is woo-woo by any stretch of the imagination. I'll make a better attempt here to explain this more clearly, since it's clear it's not being understood up to this point.
Let's start with the work of Jean Gebser from his seminal work, "
The Ever Present Origin". From this article here describing basic understanding of a few of these structures/stages from his dense work I linked to for you.
The Work of Jean Gebser
MYTHICAL
With the emergence of a “two-dimensional” structure in the Mythical, we see self reflection become a new mode of being, with this structure able to be aware of itself, and as of having an animating “Soul”. Unlike the Magic of the stage prior, Mythical cultures are threaded together with the bonds of storytelling, with tales and journeys as representational, albeit still literal, of archetypal human experiences. This stage is best represented by the circle, with the recognition of cyclical events like the moon, seasons, planets, etc.
A defining element of the Mythical structure is our old friend Duality, with polarity becoming the ground upon which this consciousness structure is built. Good and Evil, Right and Wrong, Heaven and Hell — these polarities are the constructs of the Mythic mind, with these natural laws reigning supreme over the laws of man that we’ll see emerge in the Mental stage.
The three main Western religions remaining today are each built upon varying degrees of the Mythical stage, with these grand stories still capturing billions of hearts and minds around the world. The forthcoming Mental stage sees otherwise.
MENTAL
With the Mental structure, we now have development of the “three-dimensional” awareness driven by
logic, as presented by the triangle “the base of the triangle with its two points lying in opposition represents the dual contraries or antinomies which are unified at the point or apex.”
[15]
The emergence of logical, discursive dialogue allowed Western science to evolve took centuries to come online, and when it did it stood as a stark refutation of the stages prior as highly inferior. This stage first began to unfurl after the Dark Ages found new points of light with architectural single-point perspective, the three-dimensional perspective as manifest into space with the erection of the palaces, coliseums, and massive, mind-bending churches adorned with the stories of Myth, built upon the math of Mental.
Gebser makes an extremely important distinction here, in highlighting the deficient side of the Mental stage, in what he calls “rational”. It’s unhealthy because it seeks dominance over the other structures, with the reductive perspective that humans are to be solely rational, devoid of soul or spiril, and in denial of magic. This can and often leads to extreme materialism, where the love of wisdom, or, Philosophy, is replaced with productivity and efficiency. Contemplation is replaced with action, while the technological solutions of this Rationalist deficiency only lead to the advent of… more problems.
This creates a world where materialism overrides metaphysical, and a “value-free” way of life that only leads to living “without value”. However, with the exhaustion of possibilities of the Mental and its deficient offspring in the Rational, we now find the emergence of what Gebser called the “Integral.”
INTEGRAL
The “four dimensional” stage as represented by the Sphere, Integral perspective is wholly unique in that it no longer sees its own stage as the “only” or “real” stage, rather seeks to better understand each stage. Key to the Integral is the ability to see the whole, and that all parts are representative of that whole, driven by simultaneity. What was a dualistic either/or, right or wrong approach of stages prior now becomes a ever-inclusive spectrum of thought, where the greater context is now nested within a greater context within a greater context within… all the way up and down.
Gebser points to the layering of Time onto Space in pointing to Picasso’s recent “cubist” period, where he sought to integrate multiple perspectives together at the same time, within the given 2D canvas or 3D sculpture.
Gebser called this “aperspectival” thinking, the latin “a” meaning “many”, or the ability to see multiple perspectives simultaneously. Rather than a black and white image, we now have a full color kaleidoscope of interconnected, holographic reality. He highlights this process as one of transparency; as we unfurl deeper and deeper complexity of thought, we are able to do so with greater levels of transparency.
Prior to the Integral stage, time was seen as having the categories of past, present and future, as wholly distinct one from the other. Time is linear, from one point to the next along a never-ending line. With the emergence and unfolding from the “Ever-Present Origin”, we now see a meta-perspective that takes into account the efficiencies and deficiencies of all prior perspectives.
The ultimate task of the Integral is to bear Witness to these structures in our own language and actions, as difficult as it may be. Rather than seek to install one stage of programming into our operating system, calling it the “one true system”, we now seek ways to ensure each stage of consciousness is as healthy as it possibly can be. The task of Integral isn’t for everyone-everywhere-no-matter-what to be Integral, rather, to be the healthy expression of whatever stage one may be, in hopes of allowing the great Unfolding to happen as swiftly and effectively as possible.
continued....
