# Mind: The Power of the Human Spirit *Exported from [Holy-Writings.com](https://www.holy-writings.com/) on 2026-06-20 — 1 clipping.* --- > Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Gerald Filson, Mind: The Power of the Human Spirit, bahai-library.com. > ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── > > Mind, process discussed earlier in the paper, that > holds promise for the future of humanity. > “the Power of the Résumé > Human Spirit” Le présent article met en corrélation les > concepts bahá’ís de la raison avec les per- > spectives de la philosophie. Il expose des > arguments provenant des deux sources en > GERALD FILSON > vue d’une compréhension non réductrice de > la raison humaine. Il fait valoir que même > Abstract si la science peut nous aider à mieux com- > This paper correlates Bahá’í concepts of prendre la raison, elle n’est pas suffisante > the mind with insights from philosophy. It dans cette quête car elle ne peut pas saisir > presents arguments from both sources for a pleinement comment la raison humaine fait > non-reductive understanding of the human l’expérience de la réalité. L’auteur passe en > mind and argues that, although science can revue le mode de connaissance conceptu- > help us advance our understanding of the elle de la raison, explore les implications > mind, it is not sufficient in this pursuit, as it du langage pour la philosophie de la raison > cannot capture fully how the human mind et examine comment l’activité scientifique > experiences reality. The paper reviews et le phénomène religieux permettent tous > the mind’s conceptual way of knowing, deux de nous éclairer sur les capacités et la > explores the implications of language for nature de la raison. L’auteur avance que le > philosophy of mind, and considers how the processus d’apprentissage dans lequel est > pursuit of science and the phenomenon of engagée la communauté mondiale bahá’íe > religion both shed light on the capacities peut servir de modèle pour faire interve- > and nature of the mind. After suggesting nir la raison humaine dans une entreprise > that the process of learning in which the collective visant l’amélioration du monde. > global Bahá’í community has embarked Il fait ensuite un retour à la philosophie > may serve as a model for engaging the hu- et affirme que si plusieurs philosophes > man mind in a collective enterprise for the contemporains soutiennent de manière > betterment of the world, it turns back to convaincante que la raison humaine ne se > philosophy to submit that, while many con- réduit pas à la causalité physique, la résis- > temporary philosophers persuasively argue tance des philosophes à l’idée d’une di- > that the human mind is not reducible to mension spirituelle de la raison humaine > physical causality, the philosophical resis- est extrêmement limitative. La faculté de > tance to a spiritual dimension of the human raisonnement des êtres humains démontre > mind is excessively limiting. The minds of des capacités qui transcendent la nature, et > human beings demonstrate capacities that une conception de la raison en tant que « > lie beyond nature, and a conception of the pouvoir de l’esprit humain » ou « âme ra- > mind as “the power of the human spirit” tionnelle » peut non seulement se révéler > or “rational soul” can not only be a fruitful fructueuse pour comprendre la raison, mais > way of understanding the mind, but lead elle peut aussi permettre aux êtres humains > to an orientation by human beings in the d’orienter le monde, comme l’a démontré > world, demonstrated through the learning le processus d’apprentissage discuté plus > 10 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > haut dans l’article, et ainsi, se révéler pro- I > metteur pour l’avenir de l’humanité. > > This paper is about the human mind, > Resumen > Este artículo relaciona los conceptos identified by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá as “the > Bahá’ís de la mente con pensamientos fi- power of the human spirit” (Some > losóficos. Presenta argumentos de ambas Answered Questions 55:6).1 I compare > fuentes para un entendimiento no reduc- Bahá’í concepts with some insights > cionista de la mente humana y argumenta from contemporary philosophy of mind > que, a pesar que la ciencia puede ayudarnos that are similar to Bahá’í views. As with > avanzar nuestra comprensión de la mente, any philosophical question, there is a > no es suficiente en esta búsqueda, ya que broad range of positions on the mind > no puede captar completamente como la in philosophy, but my focus on points > mente humana experimenta la realidad. El of similarity is deliberate. On the one > artículo revisa la manera conceptual de la > hand, some of the more naturalistic or > mente para conocer, explora las implica- > computational philosophical approach- > ciones del lenguaje para la filosofía de la > es to the mind, which resonate less > mente, y considera como tanto la búsque- > da de la ciencia como el fenómeno de la with a Bahá’í understanding, are well > religión irradian luz sobre las capacidades represented by approaches to human > y la naturaleza de la mente. Después de consciousness that take animal con- > sugerir que el proceso de aprendizaje en sciousness or artificial intelligence as > el cual la comunidad mundial Bahá’í se ha their models; these are explored in due > embarcado podría servir como un modelo course. On the other hand, and more > para involucrarse en un emprendimiento fundamentally, the focus on similarity > colectivo para el mejoramiento del mun- supports the goal of the paper, which > do, vuelve a la filosofía para aceptar que, is to assist readers to see how insights > mientras muchos filósofos contemporá- from philosophy and from the Bahá’í > neos en forma persuasiva argumentan que > writings can complement each other, > la mente humana no se puede reducir a la > and contribute to discourse in this area. > causalidad física, la resistencia filosófi- > The paper is structured around three > ca a una dimensión espiritual de la mente > humana es excesivamente limitada. Las interweaving strands of argument. In > mentes de los seres humanos demuestran the first, to gain some idea of the nature > capacidades que yacen más allá de la natu- of the mind, I explore helpful insights > raleza, y una concepción de la mente como > “el poder del espíritu humano” o “el alma 1 The ideas in this paper grew out > racional” puede no solo ser una mane- of a presentation to a colloquium on hu- > ra fructífera para entender la mente, sino man nature organized by the Institute for > conduce a una orientación para los seres Studies in Global Prosperity (ISGP) in > humanos en el mundo, demostrado por el December 2020. I am grateful to the ISGP > proceso de aprendizaje discutido anterior- and to Lydia LeMay, Ilya Shodjaee, Todd > mente en el artículo, lo cual es prometedor Smith, and Levin Zendeh for their helpful > para el futuro de la humanidad. comments on the presentation which have > been extended in this paper. > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 11 > > from philosophy that help to illuminate causality. More fundamentally, the > the insufficiency of reductive expla- reductionist accounts fail to provide > nations of the mind that rely solely an adequate qualitative description of > on physical or natural explanations, consciousness itself; and while science > thereby implying (or stating explicitly) may aspire to progressively “fill in the > that the mind is a purely physical and gaps” to create a complete picture of > natural phenomenon. I canvass philos- consciousness rooted in physical cau- > ophy that provides logical support for sality, philosophers have persuasively > the Bahá’í view of the mind as a unique argued that an accurate description > power that lies beyond physical expla- of consciousness requires a kind of > nations that aim to level the human knowledge that science simply cannot > mind to animal rationality, describe it access. > as arising entirely out of the operations The second strand of argument > of the physical brain, or propose that ar- elaborates on what, then, an adequate > tificial intelligence (AI) will reproduce philosophical approach to the mind > the power of the human mind. These entails, one that takes account of > reductionist accounts stand at odds those features of mind that cannot be > with our intuitive understanding of the reduced to animal or computational > mind, of course. After all, we don’t say models. Such an approach must pro- > that neurons or physical dynamics in vide a more complete account of the > the brain read and write music, just as human mind and consciousness than > we don’t say that feathers and wings either neuroscience, animal rationality, > fly. Birds fly, using these parts of their or AI. I therefore explore philosophical > anatomy, and people compose music in accounts of the mind that, like a Bahá’í > their own minds by way of their con- view, emphasize a range of capacities > scious appreciations.2 But philosophy of the mind: knowledge and rationality > can help us move beyond an intuitive certainly, but also feelings (attitudes > sense that there must be something and emotions) and purposefulness (the > more to the human mind than these intentionality of the mind). I argue that > reductionist models suggest, and pro- a philosophy that appreciates these > vide reasoned arguments for why, for features of the mind and grapples with > example, despite the success of neuro- their implications for human agency, > scientific efforts in correlating brain ac- normativity, and free will ultimately > tivity with some features of conscious- provides a more sufficient account of > ness, they fall short of demonstrating the mind than can a materialist neuro- > science that seeks to flatten these ca- > 2 This observation comes from pacities into purely physical terms, and > Colin McGinn’s rebuttal of Patricia thereby loses sight of the fullness of > Churchland’s reduction of mind to the what they are. > physical across several issues of the New The third strand focuses on where > York Review of Books. See, for example, and how a Bahá’í contribution to our > McGinn’s “Storm Over the Brain.” > 12 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > understanding of the mind may help ophy I engage with typically under- > expand current philosophical posi- stands the mind’s essential features to > tions. Even in philosophy that reso- be “human agency” and “normativity,” > nates in important ways with a Bahá’í concepts relating to the freedom and > understanding of the mind, there are, spontaneity of the mind. Through nor- > of course, differences. Most contem- mativity, we take responsibility for our > porary philosophers, for instance, even judgments and perceptions: we (po- > when they reject the reduction of mind tentially) choose how to evaluate the > to narrowly physical computational world around us, rather than passively > processes, still insist on placing the receiving value judgments pre-formed > mind within the natural world rather in the world, the way we receive sense > than accepting the possibility that the impressions. Through human agency, > mind is embedded in a reality that goes we choose our actions.5 Though “hu- > beyond the natural. This, however, re- man agency” is not too distant from the > quires highly abstract arguments, such meaning of “the power of the human > as McDowell’s position that our capac- spirit,” which on its face could be un- > ities of mind are “second nature,” or derstood as describing a supra-physical > references to “normativity” that remain capacity emerging from an essentially > apart from a natural scientific explana- physical being, contemporary philos- > tion. These positions have shortcom- ophy resists the idea of the “rational > ings, in my view, that an acceptance soul” which, for ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, is > of a wider, “extended reality”3 above > and beyond the physical or the natural Some Answered Questions 55:5). Further > would avoid. Such a reality can better research on the use of these terms in the > account for the qualitative “feel” of original language texts may provide in- > consciousness and its immateriality. sight into the logic behind specific uses of > The idea of an extended world is, of each. It may be that in some cases ‘Abdu’l- > course, built into a Bahá’í approach to Bahá’s choice of one or the other term is > based on His audience’s framework for > the question of mind, which centers on > thinking about the nature of this human > the “power of the human spirit” or “the > essence; perhaps in other cases the choice > rational soul.”4 Conversely, the philos- is meant to highlight a particular facet of > this essence which, by its nature, cannot be > 3 I take this term from Thomas encompassed by language. There may of > Nagel. course be other considerations. > 4 “Spirit” and “soul” (sometimes 5 “Both Heidegger and Korsgaard, > “rational soul”) refer to the same general following Kant, conceive of human agency > concept in authoritative Bahá’í writings. in terms of … normativity” (Rousse 417); > “The human spirit, which distinguish- “If there is room for a substantial concep- > es man from the animal, is the rational tion of the will in contemporary theorizing > soul, and these two terms—the human about human agency, it is most likely to be > spirit and the rational soul – designate found in the vicinity of the phenomenon of > one and the same thing” (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, normativity” (Wallace 195). > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 13 > > equivalent to “the power of the human investigating reality and generating > spirit,” and which is an essence that knowledge, but that, like any form of > is ontologically supra-physical. Still, human knowledge, it is an outgrowth > it may be that “normativity” and “hu- of human agency, or in ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s > man agency” are merely useful labels terms, the power of the rational soul. It > that cover insurmountable problems is a capacity that operates at a level of > in philosophy’s efforts to gain a gen- consciousness that cannot be reduced > uine understanding of the mind and of to causal interactions at the physical > human action. I suggest an alternative level in the brain. Having thus exam- > approach that relies on the power of the ined how science can both shed light > human spirit in the final sections of this on the mind, and have its own nature > paper. illumined by careful consideration > The paper is structured around these of the nature of the mind’s capacity > three strands as follows. In Part One, I to conduct scientific investigation, in > explore how different the human mind Part Five I explore the same questions > is from animal rationality, focusing on with respect to religion. Religion, like > the uniquely conceptual nature of the science, cannot simply be understood > human mind. In Part Two, I explore as a creation of the human brain; it is > implications of the conceptual nature instead a powerful way of knowing > of the mind relating to learning and for human beings, precisely because > objectivity, and suggest that in its re- of the human mind’s unique capacities > liance on self-conscious awareness as to know. I comment on the language > the foundation of thought, as well as in of Revelation, and the power of that > its capacities for feeling and purpose- language to reach not only the cogni- > fulness, and its essential holism, the tive capacity of the mind, but also the > human mind is categorically distin- feelings and purposefulness of human > guishable from AI. I add comments in reality. The phenomenon of religion, > Part Three about language as a central therefore, helps give us a fuller ap- > instrument of the mind. These sections preciation of the nature of the human > together demonstrate that explanations mind: engagement with Revelation > confined to natural science are unable can engender feelings, thoughts and > to account for the mind’s faculties of purposefulness that strengthen the > knowing, feeling, and purposefulness, mind’s relationship to an extended re- > features of mind that not only shape ality beyond space and time, to a world > consciousness on an individual level, that is expansive beyond the merely > but have allowed humans collectively sensible environment of the animal. > to generate progressive civilization, Finally, in Part Six, I consider whether > a phenomenon with no parallel in the understanding the mind as an essen- > natural world. In Part Four, I argue tially spiritual phenomenon—as “the > that scientific practice is an exemplary power of the human spirit” or “rational > expression of the mind’s capacity for soul”—can help lend coherence to a > 14 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > philosophy of mind that rejects a nar- with Abdu’l-Bahá’s statements on this > row physicalist understanding of mind, matter. For McDowell, a primary dif- > and if so, how such a paradigm can be ference between the animal and human > presented in philosophical terms. is that the human mind has a concep- > This paper is inspired by a talk giv- tual way of knowing and engaging the > en by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá on 20 September world, while the animal responds to an > 1912, in which He says that philoso- immediate environment. “World” and > phy should make efforts to seek under- “environment” are distinguished by > standing of both physical and spiritual the fact that where an environment is > aspects of reality. In that talk, He spe- defined by its materiality and sensibil- > cifically credits the enduring impor- ity, a world is a conceptual construct > tance of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle that includes both features immedi- > to the way they combined physical ately sensed, but also (and usually far > and spiritual dimensions in their phi- more) features that reside as concepts > losophy (Promulgation ch. 105). The in the human mind. Thus, an animal’s > philosophers I cite in this paper have environment, in this use of the term, > devoted years of study to those great consists of everything to which it has > figures of the western philosophical direct sensory access in a given mo- > tradition, and in their own ways, they ment. This sensing may trigger memo- > show the fruitfulness of a philosophy ries that prompt action; but the human > that, if not explicitly embracing the mind situates itself in a wider world, > spiritual, is not hidebound by an insis- within which it can invoke memories, > tence on materialist reductionism. concepts, imaginations, etc., including > ones not triggered by immediate sen- > sory input. In a similar way, ‘Abdu’l- > P O : Bahá explains that “the animal per- > A R ceives sensible things but cannot > H M : perceive conceptual realities” (Some > S E Answered Questions 48:6). “Of this > C W power of discovery which belongeth > to the human mind, this power which > Since antiquity, philosophers have can grasp abstract and universal ideas, > compared human beings with animals, the animal remaineth totally ignorant” > both in order to distinguish these two (Selections 163:2).6 McDowell, like > realities and to connect them. The work > of John McDowell, one of the foremost 6 I take the meaning of “conceptu- > philosophers of mind working today, al” for both McDowell and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá to > provides useful insight into the lim- be in line with Markus Gabriel’s definition > itations of an animal model for under- of a concept: “a concept is something by > standing human consciousness. means of which we can distinguish some- > McDowell’s arguments resonate thing or some things from other things. The > concept of a dog distinguishes dogs from > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 15 > > ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, understands the human also imply other concepts in chains of > mind as reliant on an enormous num- implication or assumptions: some con- > ber of concepts that shape a world cepts are assumed implicitly in order to > the mind then has in view. Concepts understand other concepts. Humans do > are the means by which the mind per- not draw on concepts in isolation; our > ceives and engages with that world. capacity to know depends on the inter- > Some concepts represent the material relationships between many concepts. > features of the world: by concepts we As philosopher Markus Gabriel puts it: > know red from green, for example, and > also know that red is in the concept Whatever is real is integrated in a > class of color, which is distinct from network of concepts. Every con- > the concept class of texture. These cept refers to another. If you know > materially grounded concepts exist a concept, you thereby know a > alongside others that supply us with the bunch of others too. This thesis > meanings we need in order to navigate is known as semantic holism and > the human world of institutions, norms, says that you’re able to deploy > values, principles, and language. Thus, a concept only if you’re able to > such crucial parts of our daily experi- deploy a whole battery of further > ence as feelings and purposes are also concepts that stand in various log- > conceptual, yet immaterial. Through ical relations to it. (Meaning 194) > concepts, we distinguish indignation > from anger, generosity from kindness. This emphasis on the role of con- > We learn from infancy thousands and cepts in human thought is not to deny > thousands of concepts that shape the the importance of sense perception and > world we have in view. Many concept direct experience. We take in our expe- > classes are nested within other con- rience by way of our senses, but in a > cept classes; “dog” is a concept nested manner that must always be mediated > within the broader concept “animal,” by the conceptual for us to have any > yet itself encompasses the concepts experience at all. To paraphrase Kant, > of “German shepherd,” “poodle,” and whom McDowell draws on to develop > other breeds of dog. This is only one his own idea of the conceptual, sensa- > of many ways in which concepts are tions without concepts are blind, and > profoundly interdependent. Concepts concepts without human experience > and sensations are empty (Mind and > cats, but also from lions and earlobes” World). Concepts allow us to under- > (Gabriel, Meaning 192). Importantly, a stand what we perceive, and “sensory > concept in this sense does not require di- consciousness” is always shaped by our > rect sensory comparison in order to distin- understanding: “objects come into view > guish two things. Thus, while an animal for us [by sensations] in actualizations > can distinguish different things by sight or of capacities that are fully conceptual” > smell, the human can distinguish them in (McDowell, World in View 34–35). > the abstract using concepts. > 16 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > In other words, to be receptive to the by our subjective beliefs on the physical > world we rely on a conceptual idea of world” (Tabas, qtd. in “We Hear”). We > a world that is already “there” in the interpret the sensations we experience > mind, so that as we perceive and recog- in the world by way of the concepts we > nize features of the world (whether ma- have learned, and through these con- > terial objects or abstract realities), they cepts we then make judgments about > are then available for placement within the world and take actions—for rea- > the world we have in view—or close sons that are themselves conceptual— > enough to allow relative adjustments as we advance matters at hand, or bring > to a world that shapeshifts as we gain about a better world we have in view. > further knowledge of it. Successive ex- There is thus an inseparable coopera- > periences of life bring to us a manifold tion of sensibility and conceptuality > of sensations that we are able to grasp that cannot be disentangled. > by the elimination and reduction of the This interplay between sense and > available information—the millions of concept does not seem to operate in > sensory bits available to our senses— the same way in animal cognition. In > bringing to our experience an under- McDowell’s assessment, which reso- > standable world that we then have in nates with ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s explanations > mind.7 “Our subjective beliefs on the on the topic, animals may appear to rea- > physical world have a decisive role on son in a manner that seems comparable > how we perceive reality . . . All that we to human reasoning, but their reasoning > perceive might be deeply contaminated is always a response to an environment > and to particulars, not to a world. The > 7 Psychologist Timothy Wilson animal “reasons” by way of differential > estimates that the brain is inundated with response repertoires that rely on acute > “11 million discrete bits of information senses, and their excellent memory of > per second, of which no more than 40 can environments and the particulars with- > be consciously processed” (qtd. in Heath, in such environments. In short, the > Enlightenment 2.0 73). An animal, of > animal distinguishes particulars not > course, may receive as much sensory data > conceptually, but by acute sensibility > as a human being—or more, for animals > with keener senses than ours—but to the > and memory—which, as ‘Abdu’l-Bahá > extent that they react to and engage with points out, are often better than human > an environment without needing to under- sensibility and memory, which have > stand it, the simplifying function of con- different functions than strict fidelity > cepts is not necessary for them. For recent to the physical and the natural (Some > discussions by neuroscientists on how our Answered Questions 48:2). > consciousness maps patterns of synaptic The animal’s ability to distinguish > firings in the brain onto conceptual pat- between particular objects, and even > terns, see Antonio Damasio’s Feeling and human gestures, may appear similar > Knowing: Making Minds Conscious and to our human discrimination, but has > Anil Seth’s Being You: A New Science of to do with particulars in the physical > Consciousness. > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 17 > > environment rather than conceptual Hegel 104). This is the nature of judg- > meanings. However aware and con- ment, the action by which thinking is > scious animals may be, theirs is not a conscious; for “to judge is to be aware > world that is conceptual and thus be- not only of what one is judging, but > yond the physicality of nature. The hu- that one is judging, asserting, claim- > man mind understands and navigates ing something,” to others or to oneself > both the world of physical objects and (105). The human being can thus think > human realities that are perceived and about their own thoughts (and actions), > brought to mind by our conceptual holding them in mind and cognitively > way of thinking, feeling, and engaging examining them in the same way as > with purposefulness (or intentionality). one can examine an external object. > The animals’ engagement, at whatever Human beings also rely on more ca- > level of consciousness it may be, is by pacities of mind than sense perception > way of biological needs, while human and a memory of sensory information. > beings engage with a world, not a mere ‘Abdu’l-Bahá affirms that the human > environment, with purposes and proj- capacities of imagination, thought, > ects that reach beyond the biological. comprehension, and memory—along > An example can help illustrate the with “a common faculty . . . which me- > distinction. A horse, seeing an apple, diates” between these capacities and > moves to eat it: sensory information the outer senses of perception—are > prompts a reaction. A human seeing the spiritual powers, which seems to im- > same apple may have a similar reac- ply that they are different in kind from > tionary response, but can also engage animal rationality (Some Answered > in conceptual thinking. Thus, the sight Questions ch. 56). An element of this > of the apple reminds her of a trip to an difference appears to be their holism. > orchard as a child, or of the threat of Thus, Bahá’u’lláh likewise confirms > drought, or, by way of the story of Sir that > Isaac Newton, of the law of gravity. It > leads to a decision to act in the world, [s]pirit, mind, soul, and the pow- > by taking her children to an orchard, or ers of sight and hearing are but > limiting water waste in her household, one single reality which hath > or revisiting her university physics manifold expressions owing to > textbook. the diversity of its instruments. As > The centrality of concepts to human thou dost observe, man’s power to > thought also permits a self-awareness comprehend, move, speak, hear, > about our thinking that does not seem and see all derive from this sign of > to be shared by the animal. As Hegel his Lord within him. (Summons, > argued, human thought is about “cog- “Suriy-i-Ra’is” ¶35) > nizing the distinction of things” while > “knowing and holding in mind what is McDowell seems to be driving at a > being distinguished” (qtd. in Pippin, similar concept when he stresses the > 18 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > inseparable cooperation of percep- In making a judgment, we rely on our > tion and conceptual thought, as noted perceptions and on concepts: our be- > earlier. He further points out that the liefs, our standards for truth (or our > conceptual nature of our thinking is standards of the right, the good, or the > only made possible by a “rationally beautiful), any necessary background > organized network of capacities for ac- assumptions, and logic and syntax. > tive adjustment of one’s thinking to the This reliance is seamless; while a > deliverances of experience” (Mind and person can analytically distinguish > World 29). between the sight of a work of art, the > Andrea Kern follows McDowell’s aesthetic standard against which she > thinking about the conceptual nature appraises it, and the process by which > of our rational capacity. In her import- the perception is measured against the > ant book, Sources of Knowledge: On standard, in actual experience there is > the Concept of a Rational Capacity no such distinguishing, supporting the > for Knowledge, she provides one way contention that it is a “single reality” at > of understanding the above statement work. Indeed, in making judgments we > of Bahá’u’lláh on the “single reality” often rely on concepts, including the > of “spirit, mind, soul, and the pow- standard of truth by which we judge, > ers of sight and hearing.” She, too, without consciously bringing them to > understands the rational capacity for mind (Kern 182). This is a unique ca- > knowledge as a single reality of mind pacity for knowledge that combines at > and perception. While not referring once perception, judgment, and action, > to spirit or soul, she thus agrees with along with an enormous amount of hu- > Bahá’u’lláh’s idea that our rational man learning. > capacity seamlessly brings together This capacity for judgment has con- > the conceptual mind and perceptions. tributed to a further unique feature, or > This seamless integration of capacities product, of the human mind. Human > enables us to further distinguish the hu- beings have created a world through > man capacity for judgment. Kern elab- the visual arts, architecture, music, > orates on what it means to make a judg- and crafts, as well as engineering and > ment. Judgment—deeming something infrastructure that strives to make the > true or untrue, correct or incorrect, world more beautiful. Our capacity > according to some standard of truth or for judgment enables this creation, by > correctness—is always self-conscious, allowing us to judge proportion, scale, > in that our knowing something is also and symmetry, to identify appropriate > being conscious of knowing something metaphorical expressions, and to de- > (or sincerely believing that we do).8 cide on and assess art against aesthetic > ideals. Thus, it is important to com- > ment on the arts as a feature of culture > 8 Or as Pippin puts it, “[j]udgment that likewise goes beyond the animal’s > is the consciousness of judgment . . . There often more practical and sensible > is not two acts, but one” (Hegel 105). > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 19 > > reshaping of its own environment in demonstrated a capacity to re-imagine > ways that fall relatively short of the situations on some level; similar ca- > human being’s efforts. pacities can be seen elsewhere in the > A final point on which McDowell animal kingdom, as in certain birds. > differentiates the animal and human While there is thus some evidence for > mind is that we characterize all human the great apes’ representation of the > beings as moral or immoral, but hard- object world in simple abstract and > ly ever conceive of animals in these causal, even intentional inferences in > terms. This position finds support in the mind, they are unable to adopt al- > ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s reminder that while ternative perspectives. Tomasello sum- > the scorpion may seem evil in relation marizes how, unlike animals, human > to the human being, it is, in its own beings have: > self, good (Some Answered Questions > 74:5). This is not, on its face, an attri- (1) the ability to cognitively rep- > bution of good (or bad) moral behavior resent experiences to oneself ‘off- > to the scorpion, but an assertion of its line’; (2) the ability to simulate > ontological goodness as a creation of or make inferences transforming > God. This is the sense of good and evil those representations causally, > within which nature and animals can intentionally, and/or logically; > be assessed, and all in this sense are (3) the ability to self-monitor and > good in themselves, even if from our evaluate how these simulated ex- > perspective they can cause bad out- periences might lead to specific > comes for us. Only in the human realm behavioral outcomes . . . [or to un- > is it meaningful to attribute good and dertake] (4) thoughtful behavioral > evil to intentions and actions. decisions. (4) > In A Natural History of Human > Thinking, linguist and developmental These capacities at an individual > psychologist Michael Tomasello sum- level have an exponential impact when > marizes much of the research regard- deployed at the level of the group, and > ing differences between the human give rise to human ways of being to- > mind and animal rationality. This re- gether that the more basic cognitive > search largely bears out the conceptual capacities of the great apes do not per- > differences between animal and hu- mit. In addition to the “shared world” > man minds outlined in the philosophy constructed by human language, as > above. Tomasello focuses in particular discussed below, the human ability to > on the thinking of the great apes, wide- decenter our individual perspective, to > ly considered to represent the apex of take neutral-agency perspectives, ap- > non-human mental ability. These an- preciate the perspective of others, and > imals, of course, do have prodigious coordinate action accordingly, does not > capacities. In recent experiments, often find a strong correlate in the great apes. > involving the use of tools, they have Any discussion of how conceptual > 20 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > thinking distinguishes humans from will support the argument, made later > animals, particularly in its implications in the paper, that a philosophy of mind > for coordination, necessarily requires that acknowledges the more-than-an- > consideration of language. However, imal capacities of the human mind, > before considering language in full, and rejects a reductionist physicalist > which will have implications for how neuroscientific explanation of these > the pursuit of scientific and religious capacities, need not reject out of hand > knowledge shed light on the nature of the concept of the mind as an essential- > mind, it will be helpful to explore some ly “supernatural” phenomenon. This > further implications of the conceptual argument will be further developed by > mind. considering the knowledge systems of > science and religion in light of human > language. > P T : We can begin with Tomasello’s in- > H C M L sight that the capacity of human groups > to progressively build on advances in > L I culture (broadly speaking, including > S -C A technology) is due to a fundamental > S C feature of human conceptual thinking. > Where animals can share a sensory > Having introduced key features of the environment, and use this sharing as > human mind through contrast with ani- the basis of cooperation, humans can > mals, I want to specifically explore how achieve a different degree of coopera- > the mind learns new ways of viewing tion thanks to our capacity to share a > the world. Such learning involves the world of concepts: > multiple realities of cognition, feeling > and purpose that the mind engages. human beings construct an inter- > Though the platform for such learn- subjective world with others— > ing is always our own self-conscious shared but with differing perspec- > awareness, it is important to emphasize tives . . . [this is] fundamental to > our inherently social nature as minded human cooperative communica- > creatures. Both the self-referentiality tion. (46) > and social embeddedness of learn- > ing highlight that the human mind, Tomasello’s insight into the cooper- > as discussed in the previous section, ative structure of human teaching and > operates in a world, not merely in an learning by no means applies only to > environment. This world is in fact con- formal learning in the classroom. It is > structed of many worlds, including our inherent in human learning from the > inner world and shared social worlds. very beginning, as demonstrated by > All are built out of an architecture of human infants who master “joint at- > concepts. The features explored here tention” with mothers before speech > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 21 > > develops, allowing for the coordination infant mind, other minds, and the reali- > of complex actions, and, as we mature, ty of an object world. Thus, even as the > a “collective intentionality” with oth- child learns about the object world by > ers. Joint attention, crucially, is more relying on others’ first-person reactions > than two minds paying attention to the towards, and expressiveness regarding, > same thing; it is paying attention with that world, they simultaneously learn > awareness that this attention is shared, the importance of emotions, meanings, > something that human infants are capa- and intentionality. > ble of in some form from a young age. No creature is as helpless, for as > While great apes demonstrate certain long, as the human infant. Those in- > characteristics of joint attention, these clined to see a design in the features of > do not continue to develop into the rich our existence might point out that it is > forms of collective intentionality that arguably our complete dependency on > unfold as the human child matures. other people and their reactions to us > “The idea that the human mind in its that enables us—indeed, requires is— > infant stages, as it were, looks at the to learn so early the foundation of hu- > physical world and tries to make sense man sociability: that others have minds > of it, is completely mythical . . . [O] and consciousness as we do. Obviously > ur first encounter with reality is an in the infant this is not yet self-con- > encounter with people” (Gabriel, Not sciousness, but the first glimmerings of > a Brain 37). Other people and their a world we wake up to over the years > minds have far greater impact on a ba- of our infancy as we learn a complex of > by’s growing awareness and conscious- feelings, purposes and thoughts that is > ness than the baby’s encounters with a extraordinarily vast. The human capac- > world of objects. Babies meet mother, ity to entertain multiple perspectives, > father, and significant others, and expe- for instance, which seems to elude the > rience their own consciousness by way great apes, begins to develop as early > of immediate relationships, mediated as between the ages of two and three. > by powerful gestures and enactments. The dependence of the human mind > Babies begin learning through differ- on social learning is exemplified by > ent social practices that are mindful, how we learn language. From his first > including with respect to the physi- word at twelve to eighteen months old, > cal world. The physical world takes the child acquires well over 10,000 > shape within a baby’s consciousness words by the age of six, while simul- > mediated by concepts, standards and taneously learning rules of syntax and > norms gleaned from other minds. The semantic usage that build to an enor- > baby, in effect, learns of the world (in mous complexity (Pinker)—and all > the expansive, more-than-environment this, as philosopher of mind and lan- > sense) in its mental features as much guage Donald Davidson emphasizes, is > as in its physical features, and does so done on very thin evidence and limited > by way of a triangulation between the experience. And it is not that one word > 22 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > is uttered, then another, in an additive (Language 141) that allow human > process of learning; this is a process of beings to develop ideas of objectivity > gestures, actions, enactments between by way of a detachment from first-per- > mother and father and baby, that builds son consciousness to agent-neutral > a world of sense, a holistic picture, that perspectives. At a very early age, this > is grasped by the baby (Taylor, The enables the coordination of action by > Language Animal). “Mama” may be a “we-intentionality” among groups of > the “first word” uttered, but it is already human beings.10 > embedded in a baby’s understanding of In line with the highly cooperative > a whole world of previous interactive nature of the human mind, Charles > gesture and response that has been Sanders Peirce, the seminal pragmatist > growing in the mind of the baby. This philosopher, argues, as does Hegel, > allows the baby to begin utterances that it is a mistake to think of “belief as > in speech intimately tied to a world individual belief. Of course the beliefs > that is blossoming in the mind of the of individuals are flawed; no individu- > infant, a world where the sun comes al mind is capable of an accurate and > up gradually, as it were, as the infant objective knowledge of reality” (qtd. in > develops and learns. As Wittgenstein Menand 228). It is in the shared views > writes, “Light dawns gradually over of many minds that we come to know > the whole” (qtd. in McDowell, World the world. This agrees with Davidson’s > 168). Wittgenstein brings into the pic- view that all members of the human > ture the imaginative powers of the mul- race share far, far more conceptually > tiple language-games in which human than the small proportion of views on > beings become quickly adept across which we disagree. > the many social practices of human It is always, of course, our own con- > reality.9 And, as philosophy now em- sciousness or mind, in the first-person, > phasizes, it is the sentence, not words that serves as the only platform we > themselves, that comprise meanings, have by which we engage the world.11 > facts and truths (the good, the right, This first-person awareness comes > and the beautiful). first in any order of an explanation of > Philosopher Charles Taylor, too, reality. It is important to note that our > refers to the capacity of human infants > to quickly acquire a capacity for “joint 10 See “How Language Grows” in > attention” with mothers and signifi- Taylor’s The Language Animal. > cant others, and notes the emergence 11 This discussion of the centrality > of “the cultural conventions, norms of self-consciousness is largely inspired by > and institutions, including language” the complementary views of Merlin Donald > in A Mind so Rare, and Sebastian Rödl in > Self-Consciousness and Objectivity. Merlin > 9 See Hans J. Schneider’s dis- writes from the perspective of psychology > cussion of imagination and calculation in and cognitive neuroscience; Rödl from the > Wittgenstein’s Later Theory of Meaning. perspective of Hegelian philosophy. > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 23 > > self-conscious judgments are not sim- capture the experience of phenomena, > ply subjective, although they can be. which can only be known from the per- > Our judgments about reality can ap- spective of first-person consciousness. > proach objective reality to the extent A man who is entirely blind from birth > that we have developed them in sound, will not understand and appreciate col- > cooperative social practices with other or by finding out about brain processes > minds—discovering how others judge in the visual cortex, or by listening to > objective reality, learning how to think testimony from others. He has to expe- > from others’ perspectives as well as our rience color first-hand, a phenomenon > own, bringing these multiple perspec- in the mind that is simply not made > tives together according to standards or existent by any “objective” descrip- > principles of truth that we have learned tion of the electro-magnetic spectrum. > with respect to the object world, or by Someone who is deaf cannot appreciate > standards of the good, the right, or the the impact in a hearing person’s mind, > beautiful, that we have learned by way whether by way of the mind’s capacity > of our ability to share others’ perspec- for feeling, imagination, or cognition, > tives in multiple social practices since of hearing Puccini’s “Nessun Dorma,” > infancy. We may have judgments we no matter how refined an understand- > aren’t sure of, or that are wrong, and ing the deaf person has of sound waves > those may be called subjective, but and the relationship of the ear to the > when we judge by standards or norms auditory regions of the brain. This is > of truth using our rational capacity for the nature of mind and consciousness, > knowledge, we judge objectively in a feeling and mindedness that refutes > the best way we know how. Objective any and all physical explanations of > knowledge, we then conclude, is a neu- the brain as a way to account for our > tral, third-person judgment that comes conscious minds. Yet there are avail- > after our first-person judgments. It able to the blind or the deaf, conceptual > is derivative of our first-person con- translations—not qualitatively compa- > sciousness and rational faculty as we rable in the sense of conscious appre- > come to understand each other in our ciations—that do allow, nonetheless, > many first-person to first-person ex- sufficient shared conceptions to permit > changes through life. coordinated actions. > When we think of objective knowl- Thus, if our self-consciousness is > edge, we tend to privilege more formal, the platform or space by which we > physical descriptions of phenomena. make judgments and take actions, > Such descriptions are, of course, power- this has implications for the extent to > ful: being able to capture the operation which those judgments and actions can > of air currents in mathematical terms be studied, quantified, and explained > allows the human mind to design and from the outside. Our understand- > refine flying machines. And yet such ings are always internal understand- > descriptions are utterly inadequate to ings, and while they can be explained > 24 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > derivatively by an external explanation, a concept, Hegel asked: How is it that > such an explanation is already less than concepts grasp our minds so firmly > the awareness of reality that we know that they then limit our thought and > by knowing our own minds. Indeed, an reasoning. > individual can arguably gain a better Hegel’s question provides a way of > understanding of another’s mind by the understanding an important passage of > exercise of the simple, yet profound, Bahá’u’lláh: > human capacity to take multiple per- > spectives, than the researcher could ob- To whatever heights the mind of > tain by even the most detailed descrip- the most exalted of men may soar, > tion of the workings of that person’s however great the depths which > brain. Just as we know ourselves from the detached and understanding > within, we can to some extent come to heart can penetrate, such mind > know another person’s conscious sense and heart can never transcend > of themselves, not through scientific that which is the creature of their > measurement, but through intentional own conceptions and the product > perspective-taking, aided by our in- of their own thoughts. (Gleanings > terpretation of the other’s expressive 148:1) > language and actions. We can, however > roughly, know what the other feels and As we saw from McDowell, we > thinks because we can to some extent take in the world by placing what we > take their position, and feel and think it experience within the world of con- > ourselves. And this, again, is a capacity cepts we have construed over years of > only made possible by our own foun- learning. Yet such learning may be se- > dational self-consciousness. riously misinformed. Becoming aware > Both of the facets of thinking and of inconsistencies in the vast array of > learning just discussed—the social and concepts that make up our world can > the self-conscious—have implications prompt adjustments, as can learning > for how we make judgments about new concepts or new relationships > what is true or correct, how our think- among existing concepts. However, > ing can go wrong, and how we can be- while individuals can in this way > come aware of this and respond. correct some measure of error their > A genuine capacity for knowledge thinking, our concepts and view of the > requires the ability to recognize that world can also be changed gradually > we can at times be wrong. Humans, by sound social practices that involve > of course, have this ability; yet, as shared perspectives and cooperation. > Hegel pointed out, we often overlook At the same time, Bahá’u’lláh points > the grip on our minds of concepts that out limitations to which man’s finite > are wrong and prevent sound thinking mind is strictly subjected. Where some > and reasoning. While Descartes had concepts can be changed over time by > questioned the ways the mind grasps appropriate learning, there is another > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 25 > > kind of limitation which we can nev- unequivocally call upon us to always > er overcome and which pertains to the advance in our learning and our inves- > actual workings of our own minds and tigation of reality, which sometimes > the way in which the “rational faculty” does require modifying firmly held, yet > (or soul) mediates the operation of the erroneous, concepts. > mind. Referring to the “rational facul- > ty,” Bahá’u’lláh says, T “S R ”: > F ,C , > Wert thou to ponder in thine heart, H M > from now until the end that hath > no end, and with all the concen- By what means, then, can the mind > trated intelligence and understand- fulfill this mandate, given that our > ing which the greatest minds have thoughts are vulnerable to error and > attained in the past or will attain in bound by the limitations just described? > the future, this divinely ordained McDowell’s discussion of “reasons” is > and subtle Reality... thou wilt fail helpful on this question: > to comprehend its mystery or to > appraise its virtue. (Gleanings [W]e make sense of rational re- > 83:4) lations between experience and > judgment only in the context of > Markus Gabriel may be identifying an equation between the space of > one aspect of this limitation on ever concepts and the space of reasons. > understanding the rational soul when Thought can bear on empirical re- > he points to a limit in thought’s ability ality only because to be a thinker > to apprehend itself: at all is to be at home in the space > of reasons. (Mind and World 125) > Because thinking is something > real, the conditions of its emer- The idea of a “space of reasons,” > gence are not known to us in their as McDowell puts it, refers to the ca- > entirety . . . how exactly a concrete pacities of mind by which we reason > thought process unfolds, is some- through the elements of that multiplic- > thing it takes a further thought to ity of human realities: feelings, beliefs, > grasp. No thought can catch itself attitudes, norms, memories, imagined > in the act. (Meaning 217) counterfactuals or future possibilities, > motivations, purposes, projects, and > This limitation, of course, in no way values. And if guided rightly, and with > absolves us from the responsibility enough experience in sound social > to seek to increase our understanding practices, we take on reasons that ad- > within the limits imposed on it, and to just the concepts we hold. We generate > identify and improve on errors in our reasons for the intentions and purposes > understanding. The Bahá’í writings of actions we take; and when reflection > 26 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > is required, we rely on higher values Bahá’u’lláh’s request to us: “ponder in > and meanings that override passing your hearts.”13 The cognitive, the affec- > desires and idle preferences. The rea- tive (or emotional), and the purposeful > sons supporting our intentions usually are all present in mind as a feature of > go well beyond our immediate experi- our human agency, consciousness, > ence. We rely on a conceptual shaping freedom, and spontaneity within the > of our experience in order to perceive constraints of the world we have in > the world, and rely on our imagination view and which underlies and prompts > informed by new concepts to consider our perceptions, judgments, affirma- > possibilities that don’t yet exist, but tions and actions. > may with the right sort of actions. Feelings are, in their own way, just as > And in our consideration of the mul- much evaluations of situations as cog- > tiple realities that make up our view nitive thoughts are. Ronald de Sousa ar- > of the world it is important to recall gues that we respond to the situations of > passages from Bahá’u’lláh’s Writings life with emotions learned during child- > where He refers to our “understanding hood or from literature and the arts. > heart,”12 alerting us to an understand- Such evaluations are judgments about > ing of the mind and heart as one. Our the world that rely on the mind. Robert > conceptual nature includes feelings, Pippin writes that “a rational capacity > emotions, attitudes and other sensibil- to take up the view of the other is based > ities. That we are self-conscious about on a deeper and more original affective > our feelings, often come to understand capacity” (Interanimations 133), while > them, and give them expression in lan- Rainer Forst writes, “Feelings are ex- > guage and gesture, provides evidence pressions of our beliefs and evalua- > that they can have just as much of a tions, not their opposite: someone who > conceptual hold on us as more cogni- did not have any moral feelings would > tive concepts do. For the mind is not not really be a participant in social, > simply cognitive or intellectual. The evaluating practices” (22). > mind thinks and judges with feelings as Here we see that the human mind is > well as beliefs, and with attitudes that no more reducible to an analogue of ar- > are themselves conceptual, for we know tificial intelligence than it is to the ani- > the object world as much as we know mal mind. Unlike artificial intelligence > the world of principles, purposes, norms that operates according to rules, terms > and standards, and the human situations and algorithms on only one logical > that enter into the judgments and actions level, our understanding of the world > by which we engage the world. is by way of concepts that operate on > There is little distance between different levels, including attitudes and > the heart and the head, as attested by feelings, purposes and projects. > > 12 See, amongst many, Gleanings 13 See, for example, Gleanings 5:6, > 95:4 and 100:8. 65:4, and 108:11. > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 27 > > Gottlob Frege, who developed the capacity. To appreciate the uniqueness > first “concept script” that today serves of thinking . . . even the concept of a > as the basis of the digital revolution, capacity threatens to block one way to > is also credited with realizing that our a full appreciation of the uniqueness of > human propositional judgements and thinking” (16). > utterances are always attached to atti- Bahá’u’lláh’s description of our > tude, normativity, and human agency. “rational faculty” is important to these > Markus Gabriel refers to Frege’s “co- considerations. He describes the role of > louring and shading” of thought, and the rational faculty as fundamental to > the way in which feeling accompanies the agency of mind, whose instrumen- > thought. “When we reflect on think- talities can be understood to a degree > ing itself, we also express attitudes” even though its actual nature cannot > (Meaning 75). be: > While analytical philosophy has > tended to reduce thoughts to mere prop- Consider the rational faculty with > ositions or assertoric sentences, Taylor, which God hath endowed the es- > McDowell, Gabriel and Pippin, among sence of man. Examine thine own > others, emphasize how language is also self, and behold how thy motion > constitutive, as new meanings and con- and stillness, thy will and purpose, > cepts are developed that make sense of thy sight and hearing, thy sense of > ourselves and human life. Language smell and power of speech, and > not only depicts an object world, but whatever else is related to, or tran- > creates and constitutes higher values scendeth, thy physical senses or > and meanings that define human re- spiritual perceptions, all proceed > ality. A complete understanding of from, and owe their existence > thought recognizes human agency, and to, this same faculty. (Gleanings > accounts for the attitude and feeling 83:1) > involved in the commitments and re- > sponsibility we attach to thoughts and In sum, while we inevitably must > judgments. It recognizes that thoughts dissect the mind into distinct capaci- > involve different modalities—remem- ties in our efforts to understand it, and > bering, imagining, hoping, or assert- while there is also value in investigat- > ing—and that we undertake thoughts ing correlations between features of > with different levels of enthusiasm or the mind and particular brain areas or > detachment. processes, this kind of analysis should > Irad Kimhi notes that “capacities not be allowed to obscure a fundamen- > for judgment, for language, for the tal truth about the mind, attested to by > deployment of logical words (such Bahá’u’lláh and recognized by the phi- > as “not” and “and”) and for self-con- losophers cited above: the human mind > sciousness (and hence for the use of the is not truly a composite of many parts, > word “I”) . . . are all one and the same but a whole. While humanity will no > 28 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > doubt continue to develop ever more thoughts, values, and purposes that > sophisticated artificial systems that have current salience for the person > incorporate more features that we as- reasoning, and then also uses language > sociate with the mind—some of them to forms intentions for actions. Donald > operating at levels beyond what is seen Davidson writes that “language is not > in humans—it seems unavoidable that an ordinary learned skill; it is or has > these must always falls short of the ho- become a mode of perception . . . es- > lism that fundamentally characterizes a sential to the other senses if they are > true human mind. to yield propositional knowledge. > Language is the organ of propositional > perception” (Truth 135). An animal, or > P T : a human newborn, in other words, can > L S W sense raindrops on its body and react to > them; a more mature human who feels > Having laid some groundwork by the same raindrops can generate the > exploring correlations between phil- knowledge, through language, that “it > osophical understandings of the mind is raining.” > and its workings, and the picture of Charles Taylor writes, too, of how > the human mind that emerges from the language widens our perceptual capac- > Bahá’í writings, I now return to the role ities, and increases our range of think- > of language in the human mind; this ing and feeling. Insofar as an object, an > in turn will set the stage for a discus- emotion, a value or purpose, stands out > sion of how science and religion shed in our minds, it does so in the context > light on, and can be better understood of a whole situation, a world that we > through, an adequate concept of mind. have in view and that we have consti- > Much of our conceptual capacity de- tuted by way of a language we have > pends, of course, on language, which learned. This world is built of concepts > is comprised not only of words, but put together using the subject-predicate > also of the gestures and enactments structure of language. Some features of > that accompany speech.14 The relation- the world are constructed from direct, > ship between the mind’s perception nonfigurative language—“the sky is > and thought, and human action and blue”—and some from figurative lan- > engagement with the world, is inextri- guage. Language then influences the > cable, and it is mediated by language. way we perceive and take in the world > The mind draws on language to reason (Language 93–94). Language gives us > through the desires, feelings, beliefs, new feelings, new desires, new goals, > new relationships, and introduces a di- > 14 “Speech acts involve more than mension of strong values in our lives > emitting the appropriate words. They also (33). > involve bodily action, stance, gesture, Language multiplies a thousandfold > tone of voice, and the like” (Taylor, The and more the combinations of concepts > Language Animal 98). > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 29 > > available to the human mind. It allows us. We are able to translate each other’s > us to theorize, to generate analogies languages, and even when differences > and metaphors that connect concepts, in culture and linguistic usage create > and so influences how we perceive and gaps in understanding, we can articu- > understand a world beyond what is late those differences and gaps.15 > possible for the environmentally con- The role of language in enabling, > strained animal. Its subject and predi- or constraining, our capacity to under- > cate structure gives us a powerful way stand each other across linguistic and > of combining properties and objects, cultural barriers is contentious. The > abstractions and particulars, adding to Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, for example, > capacities for logic we have developed holds that our subjective views of the > since infancy. Language enables us to world are predominantly influenced > continually make judgments, relying by the languages we speak. As not- > on logical operators that we are not ed, Davidson argues that translation > usually conscious of using—the logic between languages goes far to miti- > of identity, non-contradiction, exclu- gating the inherent irreducibility of > sions and inferences of the if-x-then-y these subjective views. At the same > sort. time, of course, different languages > The human being operates with do create different ways of taking in > vocabularies of tens of thousands of and seeing the world. Yet the point > words, and intricate rules of syntax that made by Davidson, as well as Taylor, > we deploy without pause or thought. is that there is far more overlap be- > Even when we get words wrong, or tween human beings’ worlds than > mangle syntax, our common sense way there is difference; or, in other words, > of thinking allows us to understand that our shared world is greater than > each others’ utterances. Indeed, the those worlds that are unique to each > capacity of language to enable com- culture, linguistic group, or (ultimate- > munication between minds is remark- ly) individual. Translation relies on > able for its flexibility. As Davidson has this extensive shared world of human > argued, we rely on an enormous set of beings, and conceptual differences be- > interrelated concepts that are shared tween particular languages represent > universally by all human beings, the only a portion of the enormity of con- > majority of which were developed in ceptual reality that all human beings > infancy, childhood and adolescence. share.16 Of course, something is always > This has always, through history, al- > lowed human beings to meet and con- 15 See Davidson’s Subjective, > verse across widely different languages Intersubjective, Objective and also his > and cultures, employing Davidson’s Truth, Language and History. > “principle of charity” by which we 16 See Taylor’s critique of the Sapir- > assume that other humans are rational Whorf hypothesis in chapter 9 of The > beings navigating the same world as Language Animal. Tomasello, as noted > above, makes a similar point in arguing > 30 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > lost in translation: the idea of a shared this language generation is not, as it is > world should not lead us to conclude for the AI, a sophisticated recombina- > that there are no functional differences tion of words and phrases according > between languages, or to imagine that to rules generated inductively through > a language can be learned mechanical- the analysis of thousands or millions of > ly without reference to its cultural con- texts. For the human, language use and > text and distinctive characteristics. But generation is bound up with meaning. > the point remains that the phenomenon Figurative language and new and nov- > of language, as a whole, is enabling el expressiveness in turn influence the > of a collective life for the human race birth of new aspirations, projects and > that other species do not have access purposes. They give us ways of percep- > to. Thus, where similar animals in the tion beyond the surface of things. Our > same place at a given time can share discursive activity, our conversations > a sensory environment, humans can, with others, set up new relationships, > through language, share a world across redefining previous understandings. > time, space, culture, etc. And, largely This capacity of language to shape > through language, humans can collec- and direct our inner world is particu- > tively expand and refine the conceptual larly powerful when we use language > landscape of that world, leading to de- to grapple with things beyond the > velopments in culture. concrete. Davidson writes persuasive- > As with the human mind’s way of ly that we have two languages, one > learning, its reliance on language has relative to the physical realm, and one > implications not only for the world that is about the mental realm. Taylor, > we share with others, but for our in- in turn, refers to the former language > ner world. Human use of language as “designative,” while the latter is > differs in important respects from the only sometimes designative, and more > computer’s use of language, not least often “constitutive.” Where designa- > in that a human’s use of language is tive language assigns relationships > intimately bound up with the human between objects or concepts that re- > agent’s own self-understanding, and quire little or no interpretation—“the > cannot be properly considered without ball is round”—constitutive language > reference to this. Humans are language > generators; we are constantly combin- to twenty-five words is passed, “almost > ing words, and the concepts they per- every sentence uttered by an adult native > tain to, in new and original ways.17 And speaker is a novel sentence. It is new . . . > in the sense that no one in the history of > that advances in human civilizations de- the world has ever heard exactly that string > pend upon humans’ shared grasp of a con- of words before . . . This is an observation > ceptual reality, including across linguistic that has been empirically verified over and > divides. over again by examining large corpora, > 17 Consider Noam Chomsky’s ob- transcribing actual conversations, and so > servation that once a threshold of twenty on” (Brandom, A Spirit of Trust 520). > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 31 > > requires interpretation and a less deter- them in terms of sensible things > minate grasp on such matters as feel- . . . For example, [for] grief and > ings and attitudes, values and norms. happiness . . . you say, “My heart > We use these two languages—neither became heavy”, or “My heart was > of which, Davidson argues, can be uplifted”, although one’s heart is > translated into the other—without not literally made heavy or lifted > pause or deep reflection, in conversa- up. (Some Answered Questions > tion and in how we go about our lives. 16:1–4) > ‘Abdu’l-Bahá seems to agree with > both Taylor and Davidson when He The existence of this second lan- > explains that “human knowledge is of guage pertaining to the mental realm, > two kinds”: and the inextricable influence of lan- > guage on our inner condition, point > One is the knowledge acquired to a hard limit on the extent to which > through the senses. That which any human mind can be fully described > the eye, the ear, or the senses of from the external, objectivizing stance > smell, taste, or touch can perceive of neuroscience. However precisely > is called “sensible”. . . . These are neuroscience might map out the synap- > called sensible realities. tic correlates to a person’s realization > The other kind of human knowl- that “my heart is heavy,” this descrip- > edge is that of intelligible things; tion will never capture the essence > that is, it consists of intelligible of the feeling thus described. Gabriel > realities which have no outward summarizes the issue well: > form or place and which are not > sensible. For example, the pow- Our self-conception . . . reflects > er of the mind is not sensible, nor our value system and our personal > are any of the human attributes: experience . . . It has developed > These are intelligible realities. in complex ways, in the tension > Love, likewise, is an intelligible between our understanding of na- > and not a sensible reality. For the ture, literature, legal systems, val- > ear does not hear these realities, ues of justice, our arts, religions, > the eye does not see them . . . . socio-historical and personal ex- > But when you undertake to ex- perience. There just is no way to > press these intelligible realities, describe these developments in > you have no recourse but to cast the language of neuroscience that > them in the mold of the sensible, would be superior or even equal > for outwardly there is nothing be- to the vocabulary [that we have] > yond the sensible. Thus, when you already at hand. (Not a Brain 15) > wish to express the reality of the > spirit and its conditions and de- In the closing sections of this pa- > grees, you are obliged to describe per, I look first at how language and > 32 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > the mind operate in natural science, a measured. Scientists will often ad- > language Davidson characterizes as vance the ways we perceive the world > of the physical realm, Taylor as the by relying first on metaphor and anal- > designative. I will then look at the lan- ogy with reference to the concrete and > guage of Revelation, which addresses sensible in order to hypothesize about > both the physical realm and the mental possible undiscovered causal mecha- > realm—the designative and the consti- nisms. Once the hypothesis is tested, > tutive—and how both languages relate and phenomena are observed through > to the material and the spiritual aspects elaborate instrumentation, analogy can > of reality. remain useful in understanding what > has been observed; only later are such > analogies articulated into more formal > P F : theory. Consider, for example, how > S non-intuitive findings of physics in the > twentieth century at both the relativis- > We think of science as proceeding by tic and quantum scales almost demand > way of designation, description, and to be understood through metaphor > explanation of physical and natural and analogy before the student can > causality, and there is validity to this: undertake to comprehend them more > at a certain point in the process by formally. > which human minds investigate natural The process by which science ad- > phenomena using the tools of science, vances through metaphors and anal- > discoveries are framed in this kind of ogies has been labelled “abduction” > language. In some scientific domains, by Charles S. Peirce.18 Abduction in- > as in physics, this designative language volves a way of thinking that relies on > can even be crystallized into mathe- highly focused observation, but also > matics. However, if we focus only on on imagination and a general intelli- > these outcomes of scientific activity, gence. This is a capacity of the human > framed in this particular kind of lan- mind beyond inductive and deductive > guage, we end up missing the full rich- reasoning whereby scientists eliminate > ness of the mental processes by which fanciful theories and mere superstition > human minds engage in science. by deepening their experience with, > It is noteworthy, for instance, that and intuitive understanding of, the phe- > the human ability to “cast” intelligible nomena at hand.19 This exploration in > realities into the “mold of the sensi- > ble” highlighted by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá is 18 For an informative summary, see > vital to the pursuit of science as well. Igor Douven’s “Peirce on Abduction.” > Whatever is undiscovered in a giv- 19 Peter Godfrey-Smith explains > en process of natural causality is, in abduction as “inference to the best expla- > a certain sense, insensible: it has not nation” in Theory and Reality, and as a > yet been made accessible to us to be way of eliminating other possible explana- > tions. Imre Lakatos writes about scientific > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 33 > > depth, beyond the surface observation below the surface of the ordinary per- > of the everyday world, is necessary, ceptual world. This is stressed by > as Francis Bacon wrote at the dawn of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in His discussion of the > modern science, since: role and power of the soul in scientific > discovery: > the greatest hindrance and aber- > ration of the human understand- Through the power of the ratio- > ing proceeds from the dullness, nal soul, man can discover the > incompetency and deceptions of realities of things, comprehend > the senses; in that things which their properties, and penetrate the > strike the senses outweigh things mysteries of existence. All the sci- > which do not immediately strike ences, branches of learning, arts, > it, though they may be more im- inventions, institutions, under- > portant. Hence it is that specula- takings, and discoveries have re- > tion commonly ceases where sight sulted from the comprehension of > ceases; insomuch that of things the rational soul. (Some Answered > invisible there is little or no obser- Questions 58:3) > vation. (58) > So powerful and consequential is > Insights that come from intense in- this capacity of the soul to discover > vestigation provide clues that lead to realities beneath what is immediately > theories that advance science. Such sensible that, as ‘Abdu’l-Bahá stresses, > insights emerge through the mind’s it must be understood as an essentially > capacity to associate disparate things supernatural capacity: > and find connections and resonance, > to make imaginative leaps. Thus, how- The virtues of humanity are many, > ever much knowledge is ultimately but science is the most noble of > captured in science by designation and them all. The distinction which > explanation, the mind has capacities man enjoys above and beyond the > for generating knowledge that do not station of the animal is due to this > operate by simple induction (in the paramount virtue. It is a bestowal > way an artificial intelligence generates of God; it is not material; it is di- > “knowledge” inductively from large vine. All the powers and attributes > data sets, for instance). of man are human and hereditary > Scientific investigation thus in- in origin—outcomes of nature’s > volves looking into phenomena in processes—except the intellect, > order to discover entities and forces which is supernatural . . . The > power of intellectual investigation > research programs that showed promise or and scientific acquisition is a > decline as a way of then formulating the- higher virtue specialized to man > ory that was plausible, in For and against alone. (Promulgation 20:2) > Method. > 34 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > The implications of this characteri- approach. Until recently, histories of > zation of the mind and scientific inqui- scientific advance neglected the role > ry for philosophy will be considered of haphazard inventions, innovations, > later. For the present, we can consider and advances that were initially dis- > how the human mind’s capacity for connected from theory.21 As Thomas > scientific investigation sheds light on Kuhn notes, scientists develop ways of > the distinctiveness of the phenomenon seeing particular domains of reality by > of mind itself (whether or not one sees way of a kind of sixth sense or an in- > in this distinctiveness evidence of a tuitive grasp arising from their absorp- > spiritual or “supernatural” essence to tion in scientific practice. There are > the mind). Indeed, it seems plausible few better explanations of this than the > that the way the mind undertakes sci- book on scientist Barbara McClintock, > ence may not be reproducible in, for A Feeling for the Organism. Author > instance, artificial intelligence systems. Evelyn Fox Keller describes the (often > As noted earlier, scientific advances overlooked) contributions McClintock > rely on not only inductive and deduc- made to ecological and genetic science > tive reasoning, but also on abductive thanks to how she came to “see” phe- > reasoning or “general intelligence.” nomena, a kind of vision arising out of > The role of general intelligence in her absorption and dedication to sound > particular demonstrates the futility of scientific practices. Einstein felt that, > efforts to model scientific practice on “only intuition, resting on sympathetic > a series of technical steps, or to reduce understanding, can lead [to discovery > it to an algorithm. As Hilary Putnam of new laws], . . . daily effort comes > writes, “there is no such thing as the from no deliberate intention or pro- > scientific method” (72). This is not gram, but straight from the heart” (qtd. > only due to the diversity of methods in Keller 201). > within science, which range from clas- The crucial role of intuitive under- > sification and taxonomies, to mathe- standing in science does not seem to > matical methods and computer simula- be one that artificial intelligence, as it > tions, and from laboratory experiments is currently being developed, can take > involving ever more elaborate instru- on. While AI may serve as a tool of > mentation and measurement approach- immense power for researchers, there > es to speculative cosmological theory.20 seem to be core aspects of the activity > More fundamentally, the idea of “the” of science that the human mind alone > scientific method is misleading because can undertake. An increasing number > the crucial role of general intelligence of articles and books now note how > is simply not reducible to a formulaic efforts in artificial intelligence have > failed to model “general intelligence.” > 20 See Ian Hacking’s work paper, > “Finding Out: Prolegomena to a Theory > of Truthfulness and Reasoning in the 21 See Stephen Gaukroger, > Sciences.” Civilization and the Culture of Science. > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 35 > > In The Myth of Artificial Intelligence: trillion neuronal synapses—so a > Why Computers Can’t Think Like We computer recording a simple bina- > Do, Erik J. Larson points out that the ry piece of information . . . would > enormous funds given to AI research, require 100 terabytes. The amount > which continues to rely on the induc- of storage needed to store even > tive processing of large data sets, dis- this very simple information every > place funding for more effective scien- second over the course of one day > tific research that includes deductive as for one person would be more than > well as abductive reasoning. Artificial 100,000 terabytes, or 100 peta- > intelligence’s reliance on inductive bytes. Supercomputers these days > modelling alone allows it to discover hold about 10 petabytes. And this > correlations, but provides few insights quick calculation doesn’t account > into causality; AI’s lack of understand- for the changes in connectivity > ing of underlying causes makes it error and positioning of these synaps- > prone with respect to specific cases es occurring over time. Counting > (even before considering the often how these connections change > biased and subjective rules and algo- just after a good night’s sleep or a > rithms that AI programmers write into class in mathematics amounts to . > their programs). Our efforts to devel- . . many more bytes than the esti- > op this kind of “intelligence” have not mated atoms in the universe. The > yet discovered the path to enabling AI wiring problem seems intractable > to develop a genuine scientific under- in its magnitude. (qtd. in Larson > standing of deeper forces, and causal 250) > connections at work. > Comments by Rebecca Golden of It would seem that just as animal cog- > the Genetic Literacy Project are enough nition is an inadequate model for un- > to show the potentially insurmountable derstanding the human mind, artificial > problems jointly faced by AI research- intelligence is not a convincing model > ers hoping to reproduce the functioning for our own capacity for thought; and > of the human brain, and neuroscientists perhaps our efforts to make AI in the > who hope to model the human brain, or image of our own minds are destined for > ever understand the mind completely: failure. Just as a thought, in Gabriel’s > words, cannot “catch itself in the act,” > The human brain is estimated to the mind cannot fathom itself. This is > have approximately 86 billion neu- attested to in the Bahá’í writings, and is > rons, each neuron with possibly coherent with an understanding where- > tens of thousands of synaptic con- by the mind is an essentially spiritual > nections; these little conversation phenomenon. We will explore this fur- > sites are where neurons exchange ther later, but it helpfully leads us to the > information. In total, there are broader point that science cannot fully > likely to be more than a hundred describe the world. > 36 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > It is a principle of science that evi- Bahá’í writings. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá states > dence always underdetermines theory. that the concept of “nature itself” is > Evidence, in other words, can always “not a sensible reality,” but an ideal, an > support different theories, as Kuhn abstraction (Some Answered Question > emphasizes. That is why science is so 16:3). Bahá’u’lláh likewise confirms > intent on gaining ever more evidence that we will never have a total explana- > in order to endlessly adjust theory. We tion of the natural world: > never have complete evidence as there > is always more to learn and know, and Say: Nature in its essence is the > theory is likewise always open to ad- embodiment of My Name, the > justments, if not outright paradigm Maker, the Creator. Its manifes- > shifts. tations are diversified by varying > Our scientific theories, then, can causes, and in this diversity there > never be total descriptions of reality.22 are signs for men of discernment. > Mathematician and philosopher John . . . It is endowed with a power > Myhill summarizes this well: “There whose reality men of learning > is no nonpoetical description of the fail to grasp. Indeed a man of in- > whole of reality” (qtd. in W. Hatcher sight can perceive naught therein > 11).23 This view is consonant with the save the effulgent splendor of > Our Name, the Creator. (Tablets, > 22 Quantum mechanics has also Lawḥ-i-Ḥikmat ¶14) > been used to demonstrate science inabili- > ty to arrive at a total description of nature, This perspective returns a measure > since it understands the physical world at of enchantment to nature and confirms > the subatomic level as a matter of proba- Myhill’s suggestion that poetry—and, > bilities only, not strict causality. For a re- we might add, perhaps most especially > cent discussion, see Vahid Ranjbar’s “The the divine poetry of Revelation—pro- > Quantum State Function, Platonic Forms, vides the only total view of reality. > and the Ethereal Substance.” > 23 This conclusion is based on > P F : > Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, con- > firmed by the Hilbert Space model of > T L R > quantum mechanics, and reinforced by the > mathematician Gödel’s incompleteness Having briefly considered how the > theory which proves that no axiomatic sys- mind generates scientific knowledge, > tem, even basic arithmetic, can ensure both as well as the limits of the mind’s scien- > completeness and consistency. If a model tific pursuit in understanding the totali- > of basic arithmetic can only be complete if ty of reality, I now turn to the question > it is inconsistent, or consistent if it is incom- > plete, we can be sure there will never be a use of Gödel’s theory in demonstrating the > total understanding of the physical realm. difference between mind and brain, and > See physicist Roger Penrose’s Shadows William Hatcher’s Minimalism (11) for > of the Mind, especially with respect to his references to these same ideas. > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 37 > > of what religion, and Revelation, can view of the mind, as it highlights the > tell us about the mind. Where science mind’s capacity for astonishment and > aims at a determinate knowledge of awe, perplexity and puzzlement in our > entities and forces across well-defined encounter with aesthetically stirring > domains of phenomena in its multiple phenomena. This capacity is equally— > sub-fields, the language of Revelation or perhaps even more powerfully—en- > encompasses determinate and indeter- gaged as the mind tries to understand > minate knowledge, and experience of the contingencies and mysteries of or- > realities both physical and natural as dinary human life, and to contemplate > well as spiritual and beyond nature.24 being and reality. > Before considering what the phe- Common to art and Revelation is a > nomenon of Revelation might tell us concern with meaning, and a reliance > about the mind, it may be helpful to on metaphor as a means of express- > say a few preliminary words about the ing the inexpressible. Like philoso- > phenomenon of art, and its relation phy—and unlike science considered > to religion. The reason for this is that in isolation—religion and much of art > some of the capacities of the human intentionally explore meaning and the > mind to know and experience reality purpose of life. The pursuit of meaning > transcend intellectual or cognitive ap- can, of course, be a legitimate source > prehension. The mind, as noted above, of understanding and wisdom, and > has capacities for feeling, for moral therefore a particular kind of knowl- > and purposeful action, and also for aes- edge, distinct from the knowledge gen- > thetic perception and expression. Art, erated by science. In her book The Life > as an element of human civilization, of the Mind, Hannah Arendt explores > has long justified a more capacious how western philosophy emerged in > the Greek world largely as a matter of > wonder, in the pursuit of understand- > 24 See Hatcher’s Minimalism for a ing at the level of meaning. In this > discussion of the distinct purpose and na- > pursuit, Greek philosophers, including > ture of scientific language and the language > Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, encoun- > of Revelation. I had the good fortune to > know Hatcher, and learned a great deal > tered the problem of the ineffable—or > from our many conversations. Important- that which cannot be put into language. > ly, he points out that the ways of knowing Arendt notes that Plato was often reluc- > fostered by each are complementary—one tant to put his views in writing, and that > does not supersede the other: “intuition and Aristotle wrote of “truth that refused to > mysticism may give rise to transrational be expressed in discourse” (114). For > modes of knowing reality . . . [but neither] these philosophers, as well as later > divine revelation or mysticism can contra- thinkers such as Nietzsche, Heidegger, > dict the conclusions of reason in the face and Wittgenstein, who ran up against > of the same information base . . . there is the limits of language, metaphor as- > a fundamental difference between . . . the sumed a central role in their attempts > transrational and the irrational” (114). > 38 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > to convey knowledge about questions garden of these inner meanings, > of meaning. Art and Revelation have, thou shalt never taste of the im- > of course, similarly relied on metaphor perishable wine of this valley. And > to express the ineffable. The examples shouldst thou taste of it, thou wilt > of this phenomenon in the Writings turn away from all else and drink > of Bahá’u’lláh are too numerous to of the cup of contentment. . . . > count; we might consider one example (Call ¶¶ 63–64) > from The Seven Valleys in which He > simultaneously explicitly speaks of the In this short paper, I am forced to > ineffability of spiritual meanings that set aside an exploration of the world > language is powerless to convey, em- of art and its different modalities of > ploys metaphor to provide a glimpse of language and expression, modali- > what lies beyond the veil of the ineffa- ties that engage the capacities of the > ble, and uses art—specifically the po- mind to know and experience reality > etry of ‘Aṭṭár and Ibn-i-Fárid—to help in an aesthetic and sensible way that > the reader understand what cannot be is less determinate than the knowing > grasped cognitively: produced by science. Art brings a > measure of indetermination and won- > The tongue faileth in describing der to our perception and knowledge > these three valleys, and speech of the world. Through the arts we > falleth short. The pen steppeth expand the powers by which we are > not into this arena, the ink leaveth able to bring alternative perspectives > only a blot. In these stations, the into view, and we develop our sense > nightingale of the heart hath oth- of a world that transcends the mere > er songs and secrets, which make physical by way of evaluations and > the heart to leap and the soul to reactions that are emotional as well > cry out, but this mystery of inner as cognitive. This growth in perspec- > meaning may be whispered only tives is not limited to our interaction > from heart to heart, and confided with art itself; as de Sousa empha- > only from breast to breast. sizes, we often then shift those emo- > The bliss of mystic know- tional evaluations into the situations > ers can be only told from heart to of human life. The arts thus help us > heart, to see the world in new ways. > A bliss no messenger can If this is true of the arts, how much > bear and no missive dare impart. more is it true of the language of divine > How many are the matters I Revelation, a form of language that > have out of weakness left unsaid; looks beyond the causal and habitu- > For my words would fail to al perceptions and realities of human > reckon them and mine every effort conceptuality, and aims to advance the > would fall short. mind’s grasp of realities that include, > O friend, till thou enter the but also transcend, the physical and > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 39 > > natural world.25 I turn to Revelation of Revelation as a way by which human > and its language now, drawing on ar- beings can navigate the contingencies > guments from within philosophy itself of human affairs, and develop their ca- > to support the view that religious lan- pacity for cooperation, collective inten- > guage— especially that of the most re- tions and coordinated action—features > cent Revelation—allows unique access that are unique to the human mind as > to certain ways of knowing.26 philosophy itself has argued. > If human agency, or the power of Before considering how Revelation > the human spirit, is beyond physical might shed light on the mind itself, > determinations and descriptions of let us consider in more depth how it > brain physicality, as many philosophers contributes uniquely to our ways of > claim, then it may be worth asking if knowing in general. On the matter of > we might find a better resolution to the religion, no less a secular philosopher > challenge of understanding the mind by than Jürgen Habermas has written, > relying on the concept of the rational > soul and the power of the human spirit. [R]eligion, which has largely > As a path to bringing those ideas back been deprived of its worldview > into philosophical discourse, we might functions, is still indispensable in > first investigate the capacity of the mind ordinary life for normalizing inter- > to know and engage with the language course with the extraordinary. For > of divine Revelation. Such investiga- this reason, even postmetaphysical > tion can lead us to value this language thinking continues to coexist with > religious practice . . . [and] throws > 25 Indeed, the Báb explains that light on a curious dependence of > some of the power of art may come from philosophy that has forfeited its > its ability to tap into the same source that contact with the extraordinary. > gives Revelation its force: “It is the im- Philosophy, even in its postmeta- > mediate influence of the Holy Spirit that physical form, will be able neither > causes words . . . from the tongue of poets, > to replace nor repress religion as > the significance of which they themselves > long as religious language is the > are oftentimes unable to apprehend” (qtd. > in Nábil-i-A‘zam 259) > bearer of a semantic content that > 26 Of course, as a believer in the is inspiring and even indispens- > Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, I consider His able, for this content eludes . . . > Writings, and those of the Báb, ‘Abdu’l- the explanatory force of philo- > Bahá, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal sophical language and continues > House of Justice as truths and guidance to resist translation into reasoning > that transcend the arguments and positions discourses. (Postmetaphysical > of philosophers. At the same time, I rec- Thinking 51) > ognize the need to advance the discourse > in philosophy around the existence of an . . . philosophy has itself fostered > “extended reality” beyond the merely a kind of cognitivist reduction and > material. > 40 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > has pinned reason down to only than that of science. It brings to mind > one of its dimensions, . . . the truth astonishment and solace, peace and > of assertoric sentences . . . pur- insight. It prompts in the self-con- > suing truth is the only thing that sciousness of mind an awareness of a > still counts as rational. Questions larger sense of being and purposeful- > of justice and questions of taste, ness than arises in the mere attending > as well as questions regarding the to the practical matters of physical > truthful presentation of self, are all survival. The language of Revelation > excluded from the sphere of the conveys a sense of grace and content- > rational. (49–50) ment, but also inspires determination > and perseverance; it opens for those > The questions Habermas refers to who take such language seriously a > are reflected in the content of much re- form of knowledge that helps meet > ligious language, just as religious lan- the practical imperatives of everyday > guage also addresses the capacities of life even as it provides a worldview > feeling and purposefulness which many beyond the particulars of ordinary life. > philosophers emphasize as central to an This is a language that encompasses > understanding of the mind. Habermas both the descriptive and the figurative > explains, too, that ordinary life is by no or constitutive. Thus, the language of > means “immune to the shattering and divine Revelation expresses determi- > subversive intrusion of extraordinary nate guidance, in specific laws, and > events” (Postmetaphysical Thinking well-defined principles and values; yet > 51). Revelation speaks directly to the it also involves a way of knowing and > tragedies and crises facing humani- experiencing life and the mystery of > ty, providing a context for the mind being itself. it. It conveys more general > to grapple with death itself, and with and sometimes indeterminate expres- > the appalling levels of personal suffer- sions of aspirations and noble goals > ing that exist in the world; yet even in that lead to different interpretations, > confronting these areas of human ex- and does so in a language that speaks to > perience that have so troubled human young and old, the humble or sophisti- > thought across history, religious lan- cated, with an expression that can be > guage can inspire a sense of astonish- understood by all. These two qualities > ment, awe and beauty, and bring about of language together capture realities > epiphanies, heightened excitement, of truth, goodness and beauty, enabling > love, and joy. the mind to gain an awareness and, to > The language of divine Revelation some extent, understanding of both its > provides a source of inspiration and immediate reality and an extended, in- > guidance that widens the ways by which finite reality that lies just beyond the > the mind can know and experience the horizon of our finite and humble lives. > world. It is a language that is more Genuine religious language > expansive, and often less determinate, thus takes advantage of the mind’s > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 41 > > composite of capacities and ways of the time of the Buddha, the emergence > knowing and experiencing the world, of Greek thought, and the Revelation > through thoughts, beliefs, feelings, of the Old Testament, through to the > and purposes. The mind relies on Revelations of Christ and up to that > these capacities seamlessly, adjusting of Muḥammad—have begun to doc- > flexibly to different contexts, but it is ument the ways religion stimulated > always able to be inspired and guided the advance of human capacities of > by noble values and principles that, thought, feeling, and purpose. Bellah > over successive Revelations from God, details impacts of religion on the evo- > human beings have gradually come to lution of the mind before and during > understand. Exposed to such language, the Axial Age, arguing that religion > whether in the form of the Sermon on was the impulse behind significant > the Mount, the verses of the Qur’án, or shifts in the cognitive independence > the speeches attributed to the Buddha, of the human mind.28 Jaspers, for his > human beings gain insights that have part, wrote that the Axial Age formed > allowed them to overcome and tran- “the spiritual foundations of humanity > scend the contingencies of life and . . . foundations on which humanity > providence—contingencies that, as still subsists today” (qtd. in Nirenberg > Bahá’u’lláh points out, are often “too and Nirenberg 98). This scholarship > mysterious for the mind of man to demonstrates a powerful relationship > comprehend” on a cognitive level between religion, the human mind and > (Kitáb-i-Íqán 167).27 the advance of human civilization. It > While this developmental effect of does so by understanding religion as a > Revelation on the mind can be attested general institution throughout history, > to by the individual, its effects can also rather than focusing on specific faith > be seen from a historical perspective. communities or religious labels that > Scholars such as Robert Bellah, build- are often weighed down by dogma and > ing on Karl Jaspers’ concept of the clerical interpretations that cloud the > Axial Age—a period of cultural fer- originality of genuine Revelation lan- > ment measured variously from around guage. Viewed in this perspective, his- > tory testifies to the impact of religion > 27 Bahá’u’lláh’s own language of on human civilization with respect to > Revelation consists of an enormous body culture, rationality, morality and lan- > of Writings of equally enormous range. guage itself. > He provides a practical vision of human We can reflect, in light of this view > purpose and relationship, inviting all the of religion, on the importance of > members of the human race to live in “the > utmost love and harmony, with friendliness 28 In addition to Bellah’s works > and fellowship,” and assures us that unity, Religion in Human Evolution and The > cooperation and love among the peoples of Axial Age and Its Consequences, see also > the world that “can illuminate the whole Ben Schewel’s Seven Ways of Looking at > earth” (Gleanings 132:3). Religion. > 42 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > Revelation to the process of learning knowledge and learning, we could > that Tomasello refers to as “the ratchet broaden and deepen a shared view of > effect” by which “cumulative cultural the world in both its physical and spir- > evolution” occurs in the “social learn- itual dimensions. This would mean ex- > ing” of humanity. Tomasello views the panding and deepening our perception > human mind’s cooperative nature (dis- of social reality, refining our powers of > cussed earlier in this paper) as arguably judgement, and elevating the meaning > its essential quality. Habermas’ prodi- and purpose of our lives. > gious philosophical work reflects the Here I would like to suggest how, > same idea: human beings advance by given what we have reviewed about the > a process of social reasoning in which nature of learning in a social context, > minds are engaged cooperatively and the role of language in the mind, and > communicatively in unending conver- the particular attributes of the language > sations that touch contexts of affec- of Revelation, a certain kind of “reli- > tivity, cognition, and purposefulness, gious” practice might be considered as > in an ongoing assessment of the con- a powerful tool for humanity to resolve > sequences of our actions with a view the challenges it faces. The example > to establishing better reasons for sub- provided—the social practices prompt- > sequent and better coordinated action. ed by Bahá’u’lláh’s Revelation and > Yet, even if the Axial Age provides elucidated by the Universal House of > abundant evidence of the historical Justice—may not look like most peo- > role of the language of Revelation in ple’s idea of a religious practice. But it > fostering this fundamental human ca- is, I would argue, a practice that both > pacity for cumulative cultural develop- relies on the capacity of Revelation > ment through cooperation, can it fulfill language to engage the human mind in > the same function today? Humanity a unique way, and takes advantage of > faces enormous challenges: environ- the nature of social learning. It is a kind > mental harm, gross inequities across of practice, in short, that can give the > and within countries, racism, preju- observer a reason to have confidence > dices and injustices that cause appall- in the human mind’s ability to generate > ing suffering to many, to name a few. the collective intentionality and action > These challenges represent an evident needed to resolve the crises it faces. > failure of human solidarity. Despite an It provides evidence of the power and > understanding of the human mind as enormous influence that Revelation > uniquely designed for cooperation and can have on the processes of mind in its > for collective intentionality, we seem learning to build better, more peaceful > to be falling short of the minimal level and prosperous communities. > of cooperation demanded by the exi- Over the past twenty-five years, the > gencies of our times. With a renewed Bahá’í community has been engaged in > confidence in the power of the human a collective, worldwide learning pro- > mind and its capacity for cooperation, cess, relying on an evolving conceptual > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 43 > > framework detailed in a series of let- with newer, better ways of viewing the > ters of the Universal House of Justice. world. With continued study of the lan- > The process of learning has centered guage of Revelation, and with efforts > on a systematic educational program to apply its guidance through action, > involving study circles for adults, ju- our perceptions widen, deepen, and are > nior youth empowerment programs, enriched. > and children’s classes. This program This systematic process promotes > of education involves study of the lan- in its participants a deeper apprecia- > guage of Revelation and authorized tion of the language of the Revelation > interpretations, embedded in extensive of Bahá’u’lláh, whether one believes > conversation and discussion, as well as that He is a Manifestation of God or > social practices undertaken by partici- thinks of Him merely as one more > pants. This process encourages efforts among many educators and teachers of > to generate a collective intentionality humanity whose language and ways of > that then allows for coordinated action expression make sense, are coherent, > characterized by creativity and imagi- and are also stimulating and encour- > nation. Participants learn to apply the aging. As all divine Revelations have > guidance studied, and then reflect and done, Bahá’u’lláh’s both elucidates > converse together about such actions the spiritual aspects of life and out- > and their consequences. This serves lines a more appropriate relationship > to stimulate advances in both individ- to the material aspects of reality. In > ual and collective learning among the language that is at once figurative and > participants, whether Bahá’í adherents, informative, explicit and explanatory, > their friends, families or neighbors.29 the Revelation addresses and activates > This process emphasizes both cog- those human realities of purposeful ac- > nitive learning and the development of tion, thought and feeling. > spiritual qualities, including attitudes, The impacts of the language of > feelings, aspirations, and noble goals Revelation through the learning pro- > and purposes. It relies on appropriate cess described above are thus not mea- > kinds of social practices that involve sured in external outcomes alone. In > action accompanied by others. This this shared and cooperative enterprise > is learning by doing, as described by of learning, there is an emphasis on > Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics: standards of the right and the good. > “For the things we have to learn be- There is an assumption of the nobility > fore we can do, we learn by doing” of those who participate in the learning > (qtd. in Kern 259). We take actions and process, which stimulates aspirations > we learn, replacing mistaken concepts to attain to higher levels of service, > sacrifice, nobility, and positive action. > 29 For a philosophical analysis of The mind’s self-understanding and its > this educational process, see Sona Farid- inextricable sociality mutually rein- > Arbab’s Moral Empowerment: In Quest of force each other, as the personal drive > a Pedagogy. > 44 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > to surpass one’s previous self-under- as protagonists in the development of > standing is simultaneously a drive to new ways of life. > contribute to greater social cohesion Central to this kind of development > and unity among all who participate. is growth in the mind’s capacity to > This may be understood as a process understand reality. Beyond a more in- > of self-transendence as described by formed reading of the reality of both > philosopher William Desmond: the material and spiritual nature of vil- > lages, towns, and city neighborhoods, > Religious community binds to- participants learn to perceive and pen- > gether the human and the divine, etrate social reality at a deeper level. > and out of this it transforms the This process involves a re-evaluation > bonds holding humans together. of the standards we rely on in our judg- > The sources of social power un- ments of others, of the truth, the good, > dergo a transformation that car- the right, and the beautiful. There is > ries human power to the edge of as much to learn from false starts and > humanness. We understand pow- mistakes as there is from positive expe- > er as given all along, a gift from riences. For it is not only the concepts > motiveless generosity, motiveless that come most quickly to mind that > goodness beyond the goodness of hold us in their grasp, and from which > the gift, rousing in community the we try to shake free, but deeper, more > vision of humans living together ingrained standards that we may not > an ethics of generosity in the finite initially think to question when per- > image of the ultimate generosity. ceiving, judging and acting. These are > (486) uncovered and explored by way of the > kinds of intense discussion and conver- > This process of learning, by way of a sations that occur in the study circles. > mind that develops feelings, attitudes, In describing this process, Paul > cognition, perception, and purposeful- Lample draws attention to an im- > ness relies on personal and collective age, developed by Otto Neurath, that > efforts to translate the Revelation lan- McDowell also uses to explain human > guage into advances in skills, qualities learning. We are, as it were, at sea on a > of mind, and action. The participation ship that we have to rebuild, one piece > of a few million people around the at a time, while still staying afloat. We > world has contributed to an evolving replace by bits and pieces one timber > framework for action that relies on of the ship—one concept, or group of > cycles of study, action, reflection, and concepts—after another, making grad- > deliberation and conversation among ual adjustments as we come to learn > groups of friends who begin to see new ways of thinking about the world > themselves, their local communities (174). “[T]hinking,” as McDowell puts > and neighborhoods, as well as their it, “is under a standing obligation to re- > local and regional Bahá’í institutions flect about and criticize the standards > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 45 > > by which at any time, it takes itself to as our inherited conceptual frame- > be governed” (Mind and World 81). works come under scrutiny in the light > This work of rebuilding our “ship of cast by the language of Revelation, we > concepts” is facilitated by the religious learn to see with our “own eyes and not > language at the center of the learning through the eyes of others,” calibrat- > process being described here. By sur- ing our capacity to exercise judgment, > facing the spiritual nature of the world in recognition that “justice is [God’s] > we have in view, and of the relation- gift to thee and the sign of [His] lov- > ships between the realities within it, ing-kindness. Set it then before thine > this language helps the mind advance eyes” (Bahá’u’lláh, Arabic Hidden > in its understanding of the meaning Words no. 4).30 > of things, and thereby build sound ‘Abdu’l-Bahá writes, > concepts, new ways of perceiving the > world (including other human beings). let them open wide their eyes and > It develops our capacity to reason uncover the inner realities of all > through the feelings, attitudes, beliefs, things,… Our spiritual perception, > norms, values, and purposes that jus- our inward sight must be opened, > tify our actions. Our interactions with so that we can see the signs and > others can take on a sense and a feeling traces of God’s spirit in every- > that is spiritual, not because we turn thing. Everything can reflect to us > away from the material dimension, the light of the Spirit. (qtd. in Ruhi > but because we come to see greater Institute 9) > coherence between the material and > the spiritual dimensions of reality. We From what has been described, it > develop finer discriminations in how should be clear that in our involvement > we see and hear the world in both its in this learning process, we need to > material and spiritual aspects, relying adopt the scientific approach elaborat- > on our rational faculties and capacities ed on earlier. Where scientists learn to > for knowledge as well as our capacities look beyond the mere surface observa- > for feeling and purposefulness. tions of the object world in order to de- > Genuine religious language is about termine the underlying forces and enti- > unity, love and understanding, moral ties operating in nature, participants in > qualities, and the living of a life that this process learn to look beyond the > moves a person closer to God. It is a surface of culture and external reality, > language that deals with features of the and the limitations of that way of per- > world that can guide our perceptual ception, opening their minds to a realm > attention, allowing us to see the world > in the light of those spiritual qualities 30 For a discussion of the nature of > of love, mutual understanding, care, this judgment, see John S. Hatcher’s arti- > kindness, and justice. Throughout our cle in this issue, “The Mizán of Affect in > involvement in this learning process, Material versus Metaphysical Models of > Human Consciousness.” > 46 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > of spirituality beyond nature. “It is true. I will conclude this paper, then, > common nowadays to think of science by considering whether a view of the > and religion as opposed. To the con- mind that emerges from the Bahá’í > trary, faith and reason are twins born of writings is, if not demonstrably true in > sameness and difference,” write David a scientific sense, capable of grounding > and Ricardo Nirenberg (97). Science, the philosophical view of the mind pre- > in its determinate ways of knowing, sented thus far. > represents an unquestionable advance > for humanity, but religion in the form P S : > of the divine language of Revelation T M S > provides another avenue of knowledge > and experience that complements, over- A further question, then: Is it not time > laps and extends the ways that science to recover a view that brings together > engages the world. Our understanding, an understanding of our range of mind- > whether in science, the arts, religion, or ful capacities for thought, feeling, ex- > in the practical course of ordinary life, pressiveness and purposefulness with > is always a capacity of human agency a ready acceptance, too, of the limita- > (or, we might say, the human soul)— tions of mind before the infinite reality > an expression of a mind that finds itself beyond the horizon of our finite and > in both an object world of spatially determinate knowledge? > extended entities, energies and forc- The mind and, therefore, human ac- > es, but also in a space of non-physical tion have a degree of freedom that lies > abstraction and ideals. The advance- outside the laws of causality that the > ment of human civilization depends natural and physical sciences generally > on a deepening of our understanding, take as given. While many contempo- > based on all capacities of mind: the rary philosophers persuasively argue > instrumental and designative, but also that natural science is not enough to > the expressive, the cooperative, and the fully understand the human mind, the > communicative, along with the mind’s Bahá’í idea of mind goes a step further > sense of value and purpose. in holding that the mind has a relation- > I have suggested here that interac- ship to the soul. > tion with the language of Revelation, The mind may be dependent on > particularly in a process of social the health of the brain and body, but > learning with others, draws on and it is not entirely of that world, for it > strengthens the capacities of the human reaches into a higher level of reality, > mind in a way that can help us address however uncanny or other-worldly > our collective problems, and advance this may sound to philosophers. If we > civilization. We may agree with this understand the supernatural correct- > proposition, of course, without also ly as a quality of spirituality and the > believing that Revelation, or the spe- true nature of the human spirit, we can > cific claims it makes about reality, are attain to an understanding that both > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 47 > > recognizes the constraints imposed by changes in the brain are often generated > nature, and the resulting importance of through deliberate practices—habits of > science and material means, and yet will that lead to actions. Arendt similar- > transcends those constraints in certain ly argues effectively that will is real, and > ways that rely on our learning from the is different from mere thinking. Human > language of divine Revelation. beings do manage to develop character > Neuroscience and studies of animal and right conduct, and we all are wit- > cognition are, thus, certainly necessary ness to how these can often manifest > and essential to human advancement. themselves against terrible odds in the > A scientific understanding of the brain exigencies of human life. > serves to inform a better understanding We also recognize limitations that > of the mind.31 Physical happenings af- we cannot overcome in principle. > fect the brain, causing changes in our Bahá’u’lláh comments on the limita- > minds. Lack of sleep, poor nutrition, tions of any total understanding of > and physical injuries provide all the ev- the mind given its relationship with > idence we need in this respect. It is also the soul, and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá notes that > true that our conscious and unconscious “the uttermost limit of [the power of > choices—about what to think, how to comprehension’s] flight is to compre- > judge, and what simple or complex ac- hend [only] the realities, signs, and > tions we undertake (from drinking cof- properties of contingent things” (Some > fee to learning to ski downhill)—also Answered Questions 58:3). > cause changes in the physical state of Writing to Dr. Auguste Forel, an ear- > the brain.32 There are influences going ly co-founder of the first neuron theory > both ways—brain to mind and mind to of the brain, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá states that > brain—but not all correlations amount “for the mind to manifest itself, the hu- > to causal explanations. Davidson ar- man body must be whole; and a sound > gues—effectively, in my view—that mind cannot be but in a sound body.” > there are no psycho-physical laws: But He also made it clear that the mind, > though some brain occurrences that then while “circumscribed”, is also beyond > lead to mindful actions, and some mind- the brain and body by the power of the > ful actions (the decision to drink coffee, soul: > for instance) impact the brain, there > always remains a measure of free will. It is through the power of the soul > The brain is plastic and adaptable, and that the mind comprehendeth, > imagineth and exerteth its influ- > 31 Indeed, Shoghi Effendi writes ence, whilst the soul is a power > that one of the important future pursuits of that is free. . . . The mind is cir- > humanity will be “the sharpening and re- cumscribed, the soul limitless. > finement of the human brain” (204). . . . all other beings, whether of > 32 See Sanjay Gupta’s excellent the mineral, the vegetable or the > summary of keeping the brain healthy in animal world, cannot deviate from > the aptly titled Keep Sharp. > 48 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > the laws of nature, nay, all are Our human agency operates in a > the slaves thereof. Man, howev- self-conscious way at a level above and > er, though in body the captive of beyond what natural or physical sci- > nature is yet free in his mind and ence can account for by mere descrip- > soul, and hath the mastery over tion and explanation of causal mech- > nature. anism. In considering how the mind > develops a view of the world by way > ‘Abdu’l-Bahá thus asserts that there of its relationships with other minds > is physical causality, or determinism, through language and concepts, Pippin > in the material realm, yet freedom, summarizes well the views of many > spontaneity and autonomy for the other philosophers when he states that, > mind, however circumscribed or lim- “there is something about some human > ited. This opposition between freedom capacities that . . . will never be expli- > and determinism has long been a co- cable scientifically, no matter our even- > nundrum in philosophy—how can they tual knowledge of ‘feedback loops’ and > exist in the same world? brain reorganization” (Interanimations > Yet nowhere do we find ‘Abdu’l- 65). > Bahá bothered by this problem. He ‘Abdu’l-Bahá makes a similar point, > views our minds as straddling the phys- yet draws a bolder conclusion: > ical and spiritual dimensions of a more > extended reality encompassing both. In Man possesses conscious intelli- > contemporary philosophy, too, there is gence and reflection; nature does > greater acceptance of the compatibility not. This is an established fun- > of necessity and determinism in nature damental among philosophers . > and the freedom of human mind and . . The ideal faculties of man, in- > human action. This acceptance may cluding the capacity for scientific > stem in part from the realization of the acquisition, are beyond nature’s > impossibility, in principle, of ever ar- ken. These are powers whereby > riving at an explanation of the totality man is differentiated and distin- > of the physical and natural universe.33 guished from all other forms of > Nagel’s idea of an “extended reality,” life . . . Notwithstanding the gift > some of which may be open to scien- of this supernatural power, it is > tific discovery, but some remaining most amazing that materialists > forever beyond science, or McGinn’s still consider themselves within > “mysterium” in physical reality, forev- the bonds and captivity of nature. > er beyond science, are useful ways of (Promulgation 20:5) > considering the impossibility of ever > knowing everything about physical or An “intelligence” and “ideal faculties > natural reality. . . . beyond nature’s ken” puts the mind, > including its “capacity for scientific > acquisition,” beyond an explanation by > 33 See footnote no. 23. > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 49 > > natural science. Many contemporary that also involves the spiritual. The > philosophers would agree with this material and spiritual are understood as > assessment; but ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s ref- dimensions of one single reality. This > erence to the “supernatural” is a term model is not any more “other-world- > philosophers resist. McDowell men- ly” than any other that recognizes the > tions the “supernatural” as an option immateriality of our consciousness, > for understanding the mind, but quick- thought, feeling and purposefulness. It > ly dismisses it. He writes that we need is a way of understanding realities of > not be bothered by “the fear of super- human life that are abstract and ide- > naturalism,” and argues for an explana- al, simultaneously beyond the natural > tion of the human mind’s uniqueness, world and yet immediately at hand in > however inexplicable by natural sci- the commonplace experience of our > ence, as a “second nature” (Mind and mindedness or consciousness. > World 84).34 Nagel considers “divine As Gabriel writes, “[a]s minded > intervention” as one way to explain the beings . . . we humans are in contact > evolution of the human mind but also with infinitely many immaterial real- > sets it aside, opting instead for an un- ities” (Meaning 9). These realities of > derstanding of mind that will have to mind can be called “spiritual” if “su- > wait for a currently unavailable, but he pernatural” is too far a reach, though > hopes eventual, scientific understand- “spiritual” may also raise objections in > ing of teleology that might explain the a culture that arguably lacks a strong > evolution of consciousness and mind sense of the sacred or the holy, and > (Mind and Cosmos 66–67). McDowell where material aspects of life eclipse > and Nagel both dismiss the “supernat- the spiritual. Yet such realities of mind > ural” and “divine intervention” based are “outside of nature,” beyond the > on a conventional understanding of the biological and natural, and though > “supernatural.” Yet ‘Abdu’l-Bahá un- they may be immaterial in mind, once > derstands the “supernatural” as simply translated into human action they have > that which is beyond nature. Thus, a effects on the world that always carry > mind can be embedded in nature and both material and human, or “spiritu- > the physical but also in a larger reality al,” consequences. > To support the contention that the > 34 McDowell relies on Wittgen- mind is in essence a spiritual or super- > stein’s statement that, “Commanding, natural phenomenon, we can consider > questioning, recounting, chatting, are as the insufficiency of considering the > much part of our natural history as walk- mind, or the human being, as a purely > ing, eating, drinking” in order to justify natural entity. As Pippin argues, human > his use of the term “second nature” but his beings have “no naturally determined > point, like Pippin’s, is that “commanding, niche in the world” (Interanimations > questioning, recounting” are beyond the 24). We find our place in the harmo- > natural world by the uniqueness of our hu- nization of our interaction with the > man mind. > 50 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > physical world in which we are embod- 55:6). “The mind itself, reason itself, > ied, and of our purposes and intentions, is an ideal reality and not tangible” > meanings, norms and language that are (Promulgation 111:13). It is the human > thoroughly conceptual, abstract, and mind that generates “the sciences, arts, > immaterial in both our individual and inventions, crafts and discoveries” > collective consciousness. The human (Some Answered Questions 48:4), “for > creature is never a “natural man,” as it is only physically that man resem- > Hobbes and Rousseau both imagined bles the lower creation, with regard > for their differing arguments about hu- to his intellect he is totally unlike it” > man nature. The human cannot be nat- (Paris Talks 23:3). > ural, because, as argued at the outset of The soul is spiritual and outside of > the paper, she does not live primarily nature, and so too is the human mind > in an environment, but in a world. The in its inseparable relationship to the > human being is able to conceive and soul. Unless we realize who we are as > inhabit alternative worlds and orders of human creatures, different in kind and > reality, from the political to the moral quality from animals, and from nature > and from the aesthetic to the spiritual, and the physical world, we will strug- > escaping the here and now of a natural gle to understand and embrace the re- > life, living in worlds either shaped by sponsibility that devolves upon us, as > inspiration or demeaned by a degraded spiritual creatures, to look after the nat- > imagination. What might be, what can ural world as we should, preserving its > be, and what is valuable and desirable integrity and health, while advancing > in human life, always lies beyond our our own health, spiritually and materi- > biological and bodily needs—yet such ally, personally and collectively. > a human life must also serve those > needs and be in harmony with the natu- Walk thou high above the world > ral environment if we are to survive as of being . . . Those who have re- > a human race. jected God and firmly cling to > “Before all else, God created the Nature as it is in itself are, verily, > mind.” ‘Abdu’l-Bahá cites this Holy bereft of knowledge and wisdom. > Tradition on the first page of The Secret (Bahá’u’lláh, Tablets, Lawḥ-i- > of Divine Civilization, and explains Hikmat ¶¶17–21) > that “[t]his supreme emblem of God > stands first in the order of creation and In this rapid overview of the mind > first in rank.” He refers to “the intel- and the “power of the human spirit,” > lect and wisdom” as “luminous lights”, much has been left unexplored. Of > and states that “grace and splendour” late, there has been an outpouring of > derive “from wisdom and the power of thoughtful publications about con- > thought.” The mind is “the power of sciousness, mindedness, sentience > the human spirit . . . the light that shines and sapience, wisdom and meaning, > from it” (Some Answered Questions knowledge and sound reasoning. This > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 51 > > paper represents a modest effort at engaging in the philosophical discourse in this > field. Philosophy itself remains a discipline within which many thinkers, though > by no means all, maintain a level of respect for religion in spite of the advance of > secularism. With that in mind, I hope that this paper may inspire Bahá’ís and like- > minded individuals to read philosophy, including the works of philosophers who > do not share their own views, trusting that continued earnest efforts from seekers of > truth will advance our collective understanding of the relationship between human > agency and the mind, casting light on the mind’s relationship to the “human spirit” > and “the rational soul.” > > W C > > ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. Paris Talks. Bahá’í Reference Library. www.bahai.org/library/au- > thoritative-texts/abdul-baha/paris-talks/ > ———. The Promulgation of Universal Peace. Bahá’í Reference Library. www. > bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/promulgation-univer- > sal-peace/ > ———. The Secret of Divine Civilization. Bahá’í Reference Library. www.bahai. > org/library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/secret-divine-civilization/ > ———. Selections from the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. Bahá’í Reference Library. > www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/selections-writ- > ings-abdul-baha/ > ———. Some Answered Questions. Bahá’í Reference Library. www.bahai.org/ > library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/some-answered-questions/ > ———. Tablet to Dr. Auguste Forel. Bahá’í Reference Library. www.bahai.org/ > library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/tablet-august-forel/ > Arendt, Hannah. The Life of the Mind, vols. 1 and 2. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, > 1978. > Bacon, Francis. Novum Organum, Book 1 (1620). Collected in James Spedding, > ed. The Works of Francis Bacon, Vol. 4, 1858. > Bahá’u’lláh. The Call of the Divine Beloved: Selected Mystical Works of > Bahá’u’lláh. Bahá’í Reference Library. www.bahai.org/library/authorita- > tive-texts/bahaullah/call-divine-beloved/ > ———. The Kitáb-I-Íqán: The Book of Certitude. Bahá’í Reference Library. > www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/kitab-i-iqan/ > ———. Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh. Bahá’í Reference Library. > www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/gleanings-writ- > ings-bahaullah/ > ———. The Hidden Words. Bahá’í Reference Library. www.bahai.org/library/au- > thoritative-texts/bahaullah/hidden-words/. > 52 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > Bahá’u’lláh The Summons of the Lord of Hosts. Bahá’í Reference Library. www. > bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/summons-lord-hosts/ > ———. Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh revealed after the Kitáb-i-Aqdas. Bahá’í Reference > Library. www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/tablets-ba- > haullah/ > Bellah, Robert N. Religion in Human Evolution: From the Paleolithic to the Axial > Age. Harvard UP, 2011. > Bellah, Robert N., and Hans Joas, editors. The Axial Age and Its Consequences. > Harvard UP, 2012. > Brandom, Robert B. A Spirit of Trust: A Reading of Hegel’s Phenomenology. Har- > vard UP, 2019. > Damasio, Antonio. Feeling and Knowing: Making Minds Conscious. Penguin > Random House, 2021. > Davidson, Donald. Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective. Oxford UP, 2001. > ———. Truth, Language and History. Oxford UP, 2005. > Desmond, William. Ethics and the Between. State U of New York P, 2001. > de Sousa, Ronald. The Rationality of Emotion. MIT Press. 1987. > Douven, Igor. “Peirce on Abduction.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. plato. > stanford.edu/entries/abduction/peirce.html. Accessed 20 June 2023. > Farid-Arbab, Sona. Moral Empowerment: In Quest of a Pedagogy. Bahá’í Pub- > lishing, 2016. > Forst, Rainer. Normativity and Power: Analyzing Social Orders of Justification. > Oxford UP, 2017. > Gabriel, Markus. I Am Not a Brain: Philosophy of Mind for the 21st Century. Polity > Press, 2017. > ———. The Meaning of Thought. Polity Press, 2018. > Gaukroger, Stephen. Civilization and the Culture of Science: Science and the > Shaping of Modernity, 1795-1935. Oxford UP, 2020. > Godfrey-Smith, Peter. Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of > Science. U of Chicago P, 2003. > Gupta, Sanjay. Keep Sharp: Build a Better Brain at Any Age. Simon and Shuster, > 2021. > Habermas, Jurgen. Postmetaphysical Thinking. MIT Press, 1993. > ———. Religion and Rationality: Essays on Reason, God, and Modernity. MIT > Press, 2002. > Hacking, Ian. “Finding Out: Prolegomena to a Theory of Truthfulness and Rea- > soning in the Sciences.” Keynote Address, Canadian Philosophical Asso- > ciation, 28 May 2007. > Hatcher, John S. “The Mizán of Affect in Material versus Metaphysical Models > of Human Consciousness.” Journal of Bahá’í Studies, vol. 32, no. 3-4. > Mind, “the Power of the Human Spirit” 53 > > Hatcher, William S. Minimalism: A Bridge Between Classical Philosophy and the > Bahá’í Revelation. Juxta Publishing, 2002. > Heath, Joseph. Enlightenment 2.0: Restoring Sanity to Our Politics, Our Economy > and Our Lives. Harper Collins, 2014. > Keller, Evelyn Fox. A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara > McClintock. Macmillan, 1983. > Kern, Andrea. Sources of Knowledge: On the Concept of a Rational Capacity for > Knowledge. Harvard UP, 2017. > Kimhi, Irad. Thinking and Being. Harvard UP, 2018. > Korsgaard, Christine. Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity. Oxford > UP, 2009. > Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. U of Chicago P, 1962. > Lakatos, Imre and Paul Feyerabend. For and Against Method: Including Lakatos’s > Lectures on Scientific Method and the Lakatos-Feyerabend Correspon- > dence. Edited and with an Introduction by Matteo Motterlini. U of Chi- > cago P, 1999. > Lample, Paul. Revelation and Social Reality. Palabra Publications, 2009. > Larson, Erik J. The Myth of Artificial Intelligence: Why Computers Can’t Think the > Way We Do. Harvard UP, 2021. > McDowell, John. Mind and World. Harvard UP, 1994. > ———. Having the World in View: Essays on Kant, Hegel and Sellars. Harvard > UP 2009. > McGinn, Colin. “Storm Over the Brain.” Review of Touching a Nerve: The Self as > Brain by Patricia S. Churchland, The New York Review of Books, 24 April > 2014. www.nybooks.com/articles/2014/04/24/storm-over-the-brain/ > Menand, Louis. The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America. Macmillan, > 2001. > Nábil-i-A‘zam [Muḥammad-i-Zarandí]. The Dawn Breakers: Nabil’s Narrative of > the Early Days of the Bahá’í Revelation. Translated and edited by Shoghi > Effendi. US Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1932. > Nagel, Thomas. Mind and Cosmos. Oxford UP, 2012. > Nirenberg, David and Ricardo L. Nirenberg. Uncountable: A Philosophical Histo- > ry of Number and Humanity from Antiquity to the Present. U of Chicago > P, 2021. > Pippin, Robert. Interanimations. U of Chicago P, 2015. > ———. Hegel’s Realm of Shadows: Logic as Metaphysics in The Science of Log- > ic. U of Chicago P, 2019. > Pinker, Steven. The Language Instinct, How the Mind Creates Language. Harp- > erCollins, 1994. > Penrose, Roger. Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science. Oxford > UP, 1994. > 54 The Journal of Bahá’í Studies 32.3-4 2022 > > Putnam, Hilary. The Many Faces of Realism: The Paul Carus Lectures. Open > Court, 1987. > Ranjbar, Vahid. “The Quantum State Function, Platonic Forms, and the Ethereal > Substance: Reflections on the Potential of Philosophy to Contribute to the > Harmony of Science and Religion.” Journal of Bahá’í Studies, vol. 32, no. > 1-2, pp. 7–40. doi: 10.31581/jbs-32.1-2.501(2022). > Rousse, B. Scot. “Heidegger, Sociality and Human Agency.” European Journal of > Philosophy, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 417-451, 2016. doi: 10.1111/ejop.12067. > Ruhi Institute. Book 5: Releasing the Power of Junior Youth. > Schewel, Benjamin. Seven Ways of Looking at Religion. Yale UP, 2017. > Schneider, Hans Julius. Wittgenstein’s Later Theory of Meaning: Imagination and > Calculation. Wiley Blackwell, 2014. > Seth, Anil. Being You: A New Science of Consciousness. Penguin Random House, > 2021. > Shoghi Effendi. Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, June 7, 1946. Aroha- > nui: Letters from Shoghi Effendi to New Zealand. Bahá’í Publishing Trust > of Suva, Fiji Islands, 1982. > ———. The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh.. US Publishing Trust, 1969. > Taylor, Charles. The Language Animal. Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 2016. > ———. A Secular Age. Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 2007. > Tomasello, Michael. A Natural History of Human Thinking. Harvard UP, 2014. > Wallace, R. Jay. “Normativity and the World.” The Royal Institute of Philosophy, > Supplement n. 55, pp. 195-216, 2004. doi: 10.1017/s1358246100008687. > “We Hear What We Expect to Hear.” Science Daily, 8 Jan. 2021. www.sciencedai- > ly.com/releases/2021/01/210108120110.htm > > — *Mind: The Power of the Human Spirit (Used by permission of the curator)*