On Cognitive Limit and the Ground of the Divine

I was recently reading a work on the metaphysics of Alfred North Whitehead by Thomas E. Hosinski (Stubborn Fact and Creative Advance). In the conclusion of the fourth chapter, Hosinski comments that Whitehead’s system is "an attempt to give basis for human particulars in the minutiae of the universe." My immediate gut response was to question why this was necessary? I guess I am not persuaded that we must have or find some rule or law in the depths of the cosmos to give legitimacy to what happens or occurs phenomenologically on the human level.

What is the source or basis for the need to find objective grounding for that which exhibits itself in humanity? Certainly there are the issues of being able to make objective claims about the universe, but why cannot the basis be simply in the fact that we exist? Why cannot our humanity, the fact that these things occur in us - product and part of the universe - give us enough "right" to assert claims, realizing that we do so as a particular, unique species and creation of the cosmos?

This, I believe, is part of the issue - recognizing our limit as humanity. Does this go back to the issue of epistemic distance and limit and the recognition of the other? Is this not a liberalizing tendency that perhaps points to the heart of a new interpretation of the gospel? I have no problem with objective claims as long as there is a distinction made in the type of objectivity that can be found. That is there are local, speciated objective interpretation and valuations and there are universal, meta objective interpretations and valuations. Objective claims then can be made about the world but only as local speciated objective claims. That is, we can only speak objectively when we, at the same time, realize the limit of this objectivity. Trying to find an ultimate basis within the universe for human values, etc. seems to say that these human particularities have no value nor worth unless they possess such deep rooted beginnings or sources such as in the "minutiae of the universe," or at the lowest levels. This, of course, is contrary to the idea of emergence and emergent properties.

As with all thoughts and ideas, I wonder how do I relate this back to the way of the Christ? I believe that it is at this limit, this cognitive and epistemic distance and limit , the area where we realize our inability to be all things - the limit of self, of understanding outside of self, where the possibility for a re-interpretation of what Christ is may be possible.

It is in our sounding out the depths and limits of our selves that we see return to us our acknowledgement of our finitude. And in the image that forms from this we can recognize the significance of “both/and.” It is this, what is seemingly a paradox, what can only be described as mystery, that is the ground from which the divine comes towards us. In recognizing our limit we also gain sight to that which we are. Our limits show us our interdependence, our createdness, and our possibility for further creative venture within and without our selves. “Through creativity, with creativity, and in creativity, unified by Spirit…” to paraphrase the doxology of the memorial acclamation. We find God coming not from us, but at the same time in us, from this limit of knowing that provides self knowledge.

We are reliant upon this; even if we do not at all times consciously recognize this fact. And it is when we build up our lives and systems upon the lie and error that knowledge, and therefore control, can be or is complete and within ourselves that we see the welling up of the demonic. The demonic in life is the illusion of control and omniscience manifesting itself in our actions and outlooks.