How does the phrase "potentiality becoming actuality through process" strike you?
Gods primordial nature (incorporating all of possibility and value)?
The "real" world is just the "primordial or potential being" experienced or actualized?
Without "the ground of all being" "the creative potential" there would be not an "actual world"?
Potentiality does become actuality through process. That phrase is spot on. Gods primordial nature? The "real" world...no; the limitless potential of unmanifest being is made manifest (actualized) through the interactive process of experience. The actual world we experience is nothing more than the manifestation of "the creative potential" of the ground-state of all being.
Dangerously close to Descartes, dualism (res cogitans and res extensa). The question for dualism always has been how can or do the two interact?
Minds exist in isolation in their realm of being. The space-time world of shared experience provides a means whereby minds, having their existence in isolation, can create a body in the shared realm, allowing them to communicate and otherwise interact with the bodies of other isolated minds. The shared realm of experience is only a means whereby minds that have their native existence in total isolation can achieve some means of intercourse with other such minds, by their actions and words, etc.
I object to the notion that "subjective experience" does not "exist". In fact subjective experience is the one thing of which we would seem to be certain "cogito ergo sum". The problem seems to be precisely in the form of materialism or scientism in which the claim is that "subjective" experience is an illusion or an epiphenomena of matter or just "imagination". It is precisely the notion that we are only "material" beings to which "spirituality" objects.
I agree with you that subjective experience exists. Whatever experiences and whatever is experienced must exist; otherwise, experience could not occur, could it. My friend, Theoretika, the unicorn, exists; else, how could I see and hear her? George Washington does not exist, but stories tell that he once existed, and evidence suggests that these stories are probably true. But it is our common understanding that George Washington was real, while Theoretika is not. I can see and hear Theoretika, but I've never seen or heard George Washington, only seen paintings and such of him. But he is said to have been a flesh and blood person who interacted with many people during his life. Theoretika has never interacted with anyone but me. So we suppose that George was a conscious being, like you and I, while Theoretika is probably only a contingent being whose reality to me is an illusion, although this is by no means absolutely conclusive.
Most people happily concede that other humans have "interiority, mental experience" by reason and analogy but not by scientific method. Most pet owners allege that higher animals have mental experience, emotions, etc. As one works ones way down the "chain of being" or the "chain of existence" at some point most people begin to allege that "interior subjective experience" ends but it is always an arbitrary divide between what experiences and what is inert and insensate.
The alternative to acceptance of other people is solipsism, and not many of us want to go there. But I recognize that our acceptance, although based on very credible evidence, is not certain and requires a degree of faith that similar actions are indicative of similar motivations and choices.
I assume anthropocentrism in our tendency to quickly attribute actions to motives unlike our own. We hear someone call for help, and we reason that they feel distress. We see a bird eat, and we suppose that the bird is hungry or feeding its family. We see a rock drop to the ground, and we imagine that it is not responding to the tug of gravity, because its only a rock.
I see the continuity of conscious response to experience from the first quantum particles to human perception, not distinct procedures but only vastly diverse in complexity of the same procedure.
Well any materialist (and materialism is the dominant metaphysic in the scientific technical west) will object to the notion that "what does not experience is not real". Personally I think all "actual entities" do prehend or perceive and that existence is not definable except in relation. There is innate perception of other entities which is not sensory perception. Any "actual entity" "thing which exists" must possess both mental and material attributes. Science can only observe and study the material attributes. Science thus consistently and inherently provides only a partial and incomplete picture of "ultimate reality". Reminds me of Spinoza for whom God has infinite attributes but humans are only able to perceive two of Gods attributes (mental and material) (Descartes res cogitans and res extensa).
They might object, but only because they do not agree with me that everything real in this universe is a conscious being--that includes every quantum particle, every atom and molecule, every cell and organism. It seems that you do rather agree with me. I think I agree with you that we possess both mental and material attributes. I know we are conscious beings at our root, but conscious beings are wont to experience, and I believe our experience of the mental realm may be more fundamental to us than our experience of the material (physical) realm. Thus it is that we may have a "soul" and that our soul may endure throughout many lifetimes. It is a thing upon which further to consider.
There is a notion of God as that "eternal and actual entity" which takes into his being and preserves perfectly all of the worlds experience. The ultimate purpose of the world is the creation of experience, of value. Your life is meaningful in so far as you contribute to the creation of divine value and your experiences are perfectly preserved in the immortal life of the divine. Another way of phrasing the same concept.
I see the truth in these words.
Our bodies are emanations of our minds. The universe is comprised of all the bodies of all the conscious beings (the minds) sharing it. Time is change, process; and all change is the effect of the actions of the bodies of the minds that share the universe. Every action is the manifestation of a choice. Every choice is the manifestation of the character of the mind making the choice that it will enact. Every character is the manifestation of some part of the infinite potentials of spirit. Its all a great cycle between manifesting and acting (yang) and experiencing and remembering (yin).
Now there's a bunch of wild conjecture that you will not accept unless you already have pondered the subjects, as you seem to have done.
Blessed be, prothero