A Final, Pantheopsychic Theory of Everything-Part One

A Final, Pantheopsychic Theory of Everything

Naive realism is a common sense theory of perception. Most people, until they start reflecting philosophically, are naive realists. The most common theory of perception is naive realism in which people believe that what they perceive is things in themselves. Children develop this theory as a working hypothesis of how to deal with the world. Many people who have not studied biology carry this theory into adult life and regard their perception to be the world itself rather than a (virtual reality) pattern that overlays the form of the world."

Wikipedia, Philosophy Of Perception

People who have studied biology in regard to the belief the brain creates consciousness either, through willful ignorance or outright denial, fail to see that the “world” that “perception of the world” is believed to overlay may not exist, as there is no evidence for a mind-independent, not-consciousness composed doppelganger of the content of visual perception as existence only manifests or demonstrates itself in the form of a person, and that which the person experiences. The person and that which the person experiences are composed of subjective experience.

In the mythology of brains and consciousness, before up quarks, down quarks, and electrons accidentally and unknowingly (as there were and are no gods) created brains after luckily forming a planet with air and other chemicals capable of combining into and supporting the continued existence and function of brains—as the brain (and hypothetical machines that can perform the same relevant and critical function of the brain) is the only thing in all infinity believed to create consciousness, no consciousness existed or could exist in the universe prior to the fortuitous formation of the cell.

No one can say what existed in terms of substance before there was consciousness, as (if one is being honest and not calling their consciousness something that is not their consciousness) the only thing that can be demonstrated to exist is consciousness, unambiguously defined as a person and that which the person experiences. Ironically, then, one must use consciousness to imagine what not-consciousness may be like. One cannot truthfully imagine not-consciousness because in the aforementioned futile imagination, one comes up only with one’s thought-consciousness in the form of some object one then states or strangely (but famously) comes to believe is something not composed of one’s consciousness.

A Panpsychist, standing outside in the rain, amusingly watches this centuries old, unquestionably (and thus ignorantly) believed delusion at play. Attempts to dispel the delusion receive ridicule followed by counter-philosophy that invariably fails (but is upheld by willful ignorance or brute denial)…as existence only demonstrates itself in the form of, and probably can only demonstrate itself in the form of as it can only demonstrate itself to be subjective experience in the form of a person and its experiences.


The goal of this article is to, once and for all, establish an “invincible” metaphysical and logical possibility to the entities, processes, and states of affairs in the imaginative and hypothetical phenomenon of Pantheopsychism and Pantheopsychic Christianity (AKA Christic Panpsychism). I wish to create an ironclad Theory of Everything, with the only phenomena in the phantom zone or that leaves a question mark (but that, upon rational reflection and using the nature of actual consciousness as a guide, satisfies most concepts of logical possibility) being Psytransformysticism (as a hopefully viable substitute for origination and creation ex nihilo and Atomism) and Psychic Mitosis (as a hopefully viable substitute for normative Process of Perception).

With this article, moreover, the Author concludes his railing against materialism, atheism, and the belief the brain creates consciousness.


(Probably) nothing more shall be said on these subjects as there are a literal plethora of articles and papers from the Author ranting against materialism, atheism, and brain-created consciousness and at this point going on about them (including the four opening paragraphs above) seems more and more like beating a dead horse. If one does not understand that existence only appears in the form of subjective experience in the form of a person, not-consciousness composed doppelgangers of the content of visual perception are in actuality just fictional acts of the imagination and may not exist, or at least have no rational connection to the content of consciousness as, given godless death conscious experiences are magically conjured from non-existence rather than actually derived from their not-consciousness composed counterparts….

….one is (respectfully) beyond help.

I am finished supporting and arguing for Panpsychism and Idealism and am prepared to begin my last and mightiest work: For He Has Set Eternity In The Hearts Of Men.

For He Has Set Eternity In The Hearts Of Men is the “Simaril” (I am a fan of J.R.R. Tolkien’s, The Simarillion) of my religious and metaphysical philosophy.

For He Has Set is the most heartfelt of my works and will take the form of a sermon, if you will, that will indeed come from the heart and swim the depths of the potential of Pantheopsychic Christianity if Pantheopsychic Christianity is true.

ILovePhilosophy has changed in the way it allows illustrative work: For He Has Set Eternity In The Hearts Of Men will not be an exception and will exist in plain text format with few illustrations, each chapter presented as a separate thread until, to quote Thanos: “The work is done”.


The basic unit or “atom” of apparent Existence is the Person. That is, a person is the only form in which Existence appears, and as such is the only form in which Existence demonstrates it exists. Everything that is not a person and that which the person experiences demonstrates its existence only in the form of something imagined or an inconceivable concept, as anything that is something that is not/is other than a person and that which the person experiences can only demonstrate its existence in the form of an idea in the mind of a person.

This is not to espouse solipsism. If one denies solipsism and believes an external world outside a person and that which the person experiences exist, the external world consists or seems to consist only of:

  1. Other persons

  2. Things that are not persons, regardless of whether or not they are composed of first-person subjective experience

Occam’s Razor seems to demand the omission of even the possibility of the existence of anything that is not subjective experience/composed of subjective experience, as that which is not subjective experience cannot logically or rationally have anything to do with the existence of persons and that which persons experience as persons and the things they experience are composed of first-person subjective experience. That which is not/is other than subjective experience, given that it is not/is other than subjective experience, cannot pull subjective experience from itself to use in the formation of persons.

That leaves, of all things that can exist in the external world outside a particular person and that which the person experiences, first-person subjective experience in one of two forms:

  1. Persons

  2. Subjective experience in non-person form

Given that existence appears in the form of a person, to explain the existence of persons one needs only the example of oneself, an actual person that is the “Everlasting Gobstopper” at the end of the unseen “Willy Wonka chocolate candy assembly line” that exists in the external world whose final product is persons and that which persons experience.

If one grasps the irrationality of deriving persons from something that is not/is other than subjective experience, and grasps the irrationality of deriving persons from non-existence (the magic of creation ex nihilo of persons and experience of persons by the brain)—persons can only logically derive from eternal and indestructible (though continuously mutating) subjective experience existing outside all persons in the external world.

The next “logical” step in getting persons from that which may or may not exist in the external world is to rely upon Atomism, in which the macroscopic is explained as something pieced together by pre-existing microscopic constituents. If one denies the existence of that which is not/is other than subjective experience), the only Atomism that remains is the concept of the possible existence of microscopic consciousness or microscopic experience.

Without stepping into the phantom zone of strong emergence in terms of micro-consciousness in which microscopic consciousness does not in the least resemble fragments of every experience that shall ever be experienced by every person that is or will be successfully assembled, the idea of micro-consciousness can be easily and trivially “imagined” with the weak emergence in the concept that there only exists, at the most reductive level, “Planck-sized” particles of consciousness that are the most reductive fragments of every experience that shall ever be experienced by every person that is or will be successfully assembled by these micro-consciousnesses.

But despite its seeming “common sense”, Atomism even in the form of subjective experience as the only substance and only thing that exists is not a logical and metaphysical necessity: that is, it is not logically necessary that Atomism must exist or explain the existence of persons. Some may reflexively react as if it is a necessity, but upon rational reflection one may discover Atomism is not as necessary as it seems.



If one rules out the existence of that which is not/is other than first-person subjective experience, and rules out the existence of Atomism or Atomistic-consciousness, there remains the concept that the external world only consists of holistic, undivided and non-fragmented persons, or circumscribed amalgamations or indivisible (though constantly mutating) composites of the seven types of consciousness or VAGOTET.

A homogeneous universe, one with a high level of symmetry, is the simplest of all possible universes, just the kind we would expect to happen by accident. In such a universe, many conservation laws will automatically exist.

-Victor J. Stenger, Intelligent Design: Humans, Cockroaches, And The Laws of Physics*

(* The paper is an argument against Intelligent Design)

Stenger, an atheist, was in the above quote referring to the homogeneity of physical energy, the symmetry of the universe being that everything is derived from some form of physical energy, that despite its various forms is indestructible and eternal, and answers for every phenomenon that exists or may exists in the entire evolution and history of the universe (ironically, it’s the safest bet that Stenger believes in godless death, which begs the question of how consciousness, given that consciousness is believed to come into and go out of existence, fits the homegeniety and eternity of physical energy and the concept that physical energy explains “everything”).

But if we remove the irrationality of that which is not/is other than first-person subjective experience, given the constant that the only thing that demonstrates it exists is first-person subjective experience in the form of a person, we can supplant the letter if not the spirit of Stenger’s belief in a homogenous universe with the homogeneity of subjective experience, such that subjective experience rather than physical energy (that which is not/is other than subjective experience) is the only thing that exists, and exists everywhere.

We can supplant Stenger’s idea that a universe composed only of physical energy (and presumably, supposing Stenger belief in godless death, of consciousness as a magically existing and non-existing entity) with the idea that if the universe is homogenous in that is contains only subjective experience, it is homogenous and can only be the simplest of all possible universes if the external world contains only persons as opposed to consciousness-particles or any other conceivable or inconceivable form of non-person consciousness.

In the Absence of Atomism, the only Law and Process of Existence is “Existence Just Existing In ‘Whatever’ Form”

If we do away with futile imagination of what it is like for something to not be consciousness or made up of consciousness and futile imagination of what it is like for consciousness to not exist in the form of a Person, one reaches the simplest of all possible (and conceivable) realities: A reality in which only persons exist including the external world itself, as the external world is just the interior of the mind of a Person “within” which dwells the mind of every other person that shall, will, and can exist.

In the absence or non-existence of Atomism, there are no particles either of physical matter or consciousness: there is no need for the micro to collocate into the macro. The macro in the form of complete persons is the only things that exists, has ever existed, and can exist. In such an infinity, following Stenger conservation laws automatically exist, but are expressed only in the form of the conservation of subjective experience in seven forms, and the conservation of the eternal and inextricable composition of the seven forms of subjective experience (six if one is blind or deaf, etc.) in whole persons with ever-shifting and changing examples of the seven types of subjective experience.

But it is just as deep a problem why subjective states should exist in the first place. Why should it be like anything to be me? If I did not know that subjective states existed, it would seem unreasonable to postulate them.

-David J. Chalmers, Consciousness and Cognition

In other words, we may live in a reality that so strange that Existence for no reason whatsoever just takes the form of subjective experience, and for no reason at all exists only in the form of complete persons as opposed to what persons are or would be like if subjective experience could exist in non-person form. It is safe, perhaps, to assume Existence has no choice in what it shall be prior to its being (and in eternity there is no “prior”, only what “is and has always been”) and as such it is safe to assume that Existence can only exist in the form of subjective experience and can only exist in the form of persons.


If there is no such thing as that which is not/is other than subjective experience, and no such thing as Atomistic-consciousness, there may remain only an infinity filled with persons. If one rules out the ability of things that do not exist to come into existence and things that exist to go out of or cease to exist, all the persons filling the void of infinity are necessarily eternal “spheres” of psytranformystic arbitrariness that accidentally yields (in creation of the illusion of proximity between consciousnesses) visual consensus reality.


"Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves…

…here’s Tom with the weather."

Tool, Third Eye (Spoken prelude to song)

If one applies Maynard’s pre-song statement to a universe in which only persons exist, and persons exist external one to another throughout mental infinity, “consciousness experiences itself subjectively” in the form of the number, perhaps infinite, of persons occupying the infinite space of the external world. ‘We are the imagination of ourselves’ in the sense that the subjective experience-field (the true form of a person in Panpsychism) in its formation of the things a person experiences from birth to “death” is the field’s “imagination” (re: formation) of the experiences of persons, the only things that exist independent of formation from micro-constituents.

If “there is no such thing as death”, i.e. cessation of existence of consciousness, that which is intuitively perceived as death is the cessation of observance of the activity of the “avatar” or body of a person in one’s field of consciousness, coinciding or corresponding to the transformation of the person’s consciousness into a consciousness or person that no longer appears within one’s consciousness-field and correspondingly has no “avatar” or body existing in one’s consciousness.

In this model of Panpsychism (“All-Is-Mind” or “All-Is-Consciousness”), an infinity filled only with persons (human, animal, and insect consciousness) can in principle be godless, such that atheists are correct, but not in the way they have expected or believed as rather than a pre-brain non-existence of consciousness or future extinction of consciousness there is an atheistic Panpsychism in which the only thing that exists are eternal persons experiencing ever-changing human, animal, and insect consciousness. In such a domain an automatic re-incarnation exists in which a person that “dies” merely transmutes into another person (human, animal, or insect), as consciousness exists in lieu of physical energy but carries the charge of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics in the form of a 1st Law of Psyche in which “consciousness is neither created nor destroyed, but merely changes form”.

An interesting property to this model of existence is the absence of the Process of Perception. The only thing that exists are person-fields that arbitrarily and randomly generates content of consciousness that fortuitously (as verbally reported by one human to the avatar of another) mirrors the visual content of other person-fields, generating a random, accidental, and causally-meaningless consensus reality.


One denying Atheistic Panpsychism may believe in the existence of a Theistic Panpsychism in which a number of the persons making up the content of the external world outside the consciousness of a particular person somehow has the power to impute (and therefore control) the content of consciousness of other persons in the continuum. If there exists external persons with the ability to control the experiences of others, with the assumption that others do not in turn have the power to control the content of consciousness of the controllers, the controllers may qualify as deities or gods, defined by C. Scott Littleton as:

‘…beings with powers greater than those of ordinary humans, but who interacts with humans, positively or negatively, in ways that carry humans to new levels of consciousness beyond the grounded preoccupations of ordinary life’.

The mode or method of causation or transmission of content of consciousness from a god to a human being (or animal or insect) may be the mode introduced and explained in what follows, but is generally non-explained. Nevertheless, it seems that in Theistic Panpsychism whether Pantheistic or Monotheistic a Process of Perception exists, with the minds of gods rather than external objects being the distal objects yielding, either minimally, partially, or completely, the percepts of the consciousness of Man.


In Theistic Panpsychism in which gods provide minimally, partially, or completely the content of consciousness of man, the general picture is reflexively that of gods existing outside or separate from humans, animals, and insects. Gods are essentially people that exist outside the person-fields of their subordinates and control the content of consciousness and perception of their subordinates.

Agent Jimmy Woo: Wanda manipulates people’s perceptions, makes them hallucinate.

Dr. Darcy Lewis: Yeah that’s her whole bag.

-WandaVision (DisneyPlus Television series) Episode 5: On A Very Special Episode

Perhaps the final possibility inherent in a “Pan-Person-Psychism” (a Panpsychism in which only whole persons exist) is a Theistic Panpsychism in which the external world is not an infinite mental space filled with separate persons in Atheistic or Theistic Panpsychism—but is a Person or the internal mind of a Person.


Atheist:[/b] If God exists, why can’t we see him? Show me God, have Him appear before me now, and I will believe God exists.

Pantheopsychic Theist: That’s going to be a problem. We…err…we can’t produce God or have him appear before you.

Atheist: Ah ha! You admit that God cannot appear. That’s because he probably does not exist.

Pantheopsychic Theist: I’m not saying he doesn’t exist, I’m saying we can’t produce God and He can’t appear because…well…

we’re inside Him.

Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said:

“People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked at your objects of worship, I found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.

Him whom you ignorantly worship—I now proclaim to you.

“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live, and move, and have our being.’

As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring’.”

-Acts 17:22-28

In another story, the fallen archangel Asmodel invades the Silver City with an army of Bull-Host angels and Neron’s demons to claim the Throne of God, only to be told by Zauriel that the Presence was not, in actuality, truly sitting upon a throne in the highest Heaven—he was part of everything and everyone, part of Heaven and Earth and perhaps even Hell itself, and thus could never be dethroned by any rebel, be they mortal or angel.

-Wikipedia, The Presence (the Judeo-Christian God in DC Comics)

Pantheopsychic (“All-God’s-Mind” or “It’s-All-In-God’s-Mind”) Theology is based upon the “in him” in the biblical verse: “For in him we live, and move, and have our being” (Acts 17:28).

Pantheopsychic Theism interprets the phrase fragment: “in him” to mean not ‘because of Him’ or ‘by Him’, but ‘within Him’, re: within God or within the mind of God—as opposed to the universe existing outside or separate from God.


‘For in him (re: inside Him) we live, and move, and have our being” (Acts 17:28).

In this model of Existence, the Judeo-Christian God is the external world rather than someone living within the external world. The idea that infinity is ultimately the inner space of the mind of the Judeo-Christian or Abrahamic God in a Panpsychic domain in which consciousness is the only thing that exists and can only exist in the form of persons yields, countering Stenger and his idea of a highly symmetrical and conservative physical universe, the universe arguably having the greatest symmetry and simplicity as nothing, not even the external world itself, is exempt from being composed of consciousness and being a Person, as a person and that which the person experiences is probably the only form Existence can take.

The idea of a ‘god’, then, is taken to the absolute as Pantheopsychic Theism proposes the existence of a single Person responsible for the existence of every other person and the necessity of the existence of any person to hinge upon the content within the mind of the External Person as, in order for a person to exist, the person must be imagined by the External Person.

For in him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him.

-Colossians 1:16 (NIV, KJV)

Though Pantheopsychic Theism charges that though God created all things, and though all things and every person that shall ever exist is known to God and exists only because they can only exist if God imagines them, not everyone and everything is deliberately and willingly created by God.

Things are created, in Pantheopsychic Theism, by God in one of three distinct personalities, and in three distinct states of consciousness:

  1. Full Wakeful Awareness

  2. Lucid Dreaming

  3. Non-Lucid Dreaming

God unwillingly and accidentally creates things while in consciousness state (3). The existence of state (3) and the hypothetical and metaphysically and logically possible ability of God to exist in state [3] is the foundation of what may be argued to be a viable theodicy.



If Judeo-Christian Pantheopsychism exists (as there are conceivable forms of Pantheopsychic Theism in which Zeus, Quetzalcoatl, Isis, and other gods and goddesses exist as the External Person) and reality at the most reductive level consists of a single Mind that forms the external world (other minds need not exist), there are at least two types of possible Pantheopsychic Worlds that may exist:

  1. A World of Pantheopsychic Solipsism

  2. A World of Pantheopsychic Inheritism

I. PANTHEOPSYCHIC SOLIPSISM (1st Connotation of Colossians 1:16)

For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.

-Colossians 1:16

The First Connotation of Colossians 1:16 is a possible reality Judeo-Christian Pantheopsychic Solipsism, a reality in which the only thing that exists is consciousness, consciousness can only assume or exist in the form of persons, and the external world itself is a Person in the sense of being the interior of the mind of a person, but solipsism exists: the only person that exists or can exist in Judeo-Christian Pantheopsychic Solipsism is the Judeo-Christian God.

If JCPS is true humans, animals, and insects (if animals and insects are not unanimously philosoper’s zombies) are in actuality the Judeo-Christian God experiencing himself as a particular human, animal, and insect and ultimately as every human, animal, and insect that would have existed or could have existed if not for the existence of solipsism.

That is, in JCPS there are no non-God beings but only the Judeo-Christian God who spends His days as a cosmic “actor” that, perhaps as an autonomous and inexorable feature of the content of His consciousness spends eternity staging internal “Broadway plays” featuring Himself in the role of imaginary beings distinct from His indigenous consciousness (one can argue that, in the spirit of Genesis 1:26, all non-God beings are indeed variations on the theme of God himself).

To perform such “plays”, God imagines the possible existence of, then “gets into character” and assumes the “role of every angel, demon, human, animal, and insect that would have existed if not for the existence of solipsism.

In the throes of Pantheopsychic Solipsism God experiences Time in linear form, experiencing what it is like to be one non-God being in the entirety of its existence before moving on to the next being. For example, After a certain human’s “death” (which is just God shedding the “wardrobe” of that particular “consciousness” to take out the next “consciousness” he is to portray), God begins existence as a spider. After the spider’s death, God experiences himself as Donald Trump; a mass shooter; a Satanist; an angel; a Spanish maid greeting her children after a day’s work, and so on.

If Judeo-Christian Pantheopsychic Solipsism is true, you are not actually you. You are the Judeo-Christian God believing he is you as the subjective experience that makes Him up “Sauron-shapes” into his experience of being you. He must believe he is you because His subjective experience (the God-substance) assumes an amnesia in which He cannot experience His indigenous self but earnestly believes He is you. If another being existed, knew his true identity and approached him with the idea He was the Judeo-Christian God and not you, he would think the person insane.

Other people, animals, and insects in the “Sauron-shape” of God’s consciousness as he is in the form of you are philosopher’s zombies—constructs of God’s consciousness that behave toward the first-person subject of experience (God in “you” form) as if they have consciousness and meaningfully and appropriately react to “your” actions toward them, but completely lack consciousness.


According to this argument, it is conceivable that there be a system that is physically identical to a conscious being, but that lacks at least some of that being’s conscious states. Such a system might be a zombie: a system that is physically identical to a conscious being but that lacks consciousness entirely. It might also be an invert, with some of the original being’s experiences replaced by different experiences, or a partial zombie, with some experiences absent, or a combination thereof. These systems will look identical to a normal conscious being from the third-person perspective: in particular, their brain processes will be molecule-for-molecule identical with the original, and their behavior will be indistinguishable. But things will be different from the first-person point of view. What it is like to be an invert or a partial zombie will differ from what it is like to be the original being. And there is nothing it is like to be a zombie.

There is little reason to believe that zombies exist in the actual world. But many hold that they are at least conceivable: we can coherently imagine zombies, and there is no contradiction in the idea that reveals itself even on reflection. As an extension of the idea, many hold that the same goes for a zombie world: a universe physically identical to ours, but in which there is no consciousness. Something similar applies to inverts and other duplicates.

From the conceivability of zombies, proponents of the argument infer their metaphysical possibility. Zombies are probably not naturally possible: they probably cannot exist in our world, with its laws of nature. But the argument holds that zombies could have existed, perhaps in a very different sort of universe. For example, it is sometimes suggested that God could have created a zombie world, if he had so chosen. From here, it is inferred that consciousness must be nonphysical. If there is a metaphysically possible universe that is physically identical to ours but that lacks consciousness, then consciousness must be a further, nonphysical component of our universe. If God could have created a zombie world, then (as Kripke puts it) after creating the physical processes in our world, he had to do more work to ensure that it contained consciousness.

-David J. Chalmers, Consciousness And Its Place In Nature

While God is busy being you, you (as a separate non-God individual) do not exist and no other being in the totality of infinity exists: only God exists and “everyone” around the first-person subject of experience of God regardless of whether or not he is in the form of you or any other being are philosopher’s zombies. When “you” die (that is, when God transforms from being you to being the next person in the line of beings who would or could have existed in lieu of His solipsism), it is merely the subjective experience that makes up God shifting its shape from “you” into the “wolf, serpent, monster, and own accustomed form” of the next person God will play in the one-person Broadway play that is the only form Existence can take in this possible version of Pantheopsychic existence.

The Logical Necessity For The Mortality Of “Beings” In Pantheopsychic Solipsism

For Pantheopsychic Solipsism to work it is logically necessary that every being God assumes and comes to believe he is have finite rather than infinite or eternal existence. God must logically be the only immortal person and the only person that can eternally exist as it would be impossible for God to assume the form of the another “person” in the line of more than one person if God is eternally busy being a particular eternally existent “non-God” being.

This observation parallels one in the Author’s earlier work—the comic Weird Christianity #1: The Problem With Omniscience!: if a classically Omniscient God cannot, for even a Planck-second, fail to know the location, appearance, and behavior of every physical particle (the Author at that time believed in the existence of physical matter and particles) in existence, if a particle eternally existed, it would be impossible for God to concentrate on anything other than that particle for all eternity as it is logically impossible for God to pay simultaneous and undivided attention to anything other than the particle:


Judeo-Christian Solipsism like normative solipsism is naturally counterintuitive, but there is nothing that logically prevents it (after all, Existence takes the form of apparent solipsism). While it is logically and metaphysically possible for existence to exist in the form of just the Judeo-Christian God continuously having His consciousness transformed into the shape of every “non-God being” that “exists”, in the population of possible worlds or possible Judeo-Christian worlds lies Romans 6:23—

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

—which renders Pantheopsychic Solipsism untenable.

Pantheopsychic Solipsism renders the fulfillment of Romans 6:23 impossible as:

  1. The problem of eternal persons in Pantheopsychic Solipsism persists

  2. While it is possible for a solipsistic version of God to be beings rescued from sin and eternal death, the Christian narrative of God’s salvation becomes meaningless as there is no other with whom God can interact. God is not saving anyone from anything as reality just consists of God pretending to be beings other than Himself. Save for an automous psychodynamic or psychomechanical process in which God’s mind must always express itself in the form of “others”, it does not follow why God would play at being non-existent others in a game of faux psychological evolution and existential survival.

II. PANTHEOPSYCHIC INHERITISM ( 2nd Connotation of Colossians 1:16)

For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.

-Colossians 1:16

The second connotation of Colossians 1:16 if Pantheopsychism in favor of the Judeo-Christian God is true is the possibility of Pantheopsychic Inheritism: a state of affairs in which Man is the offspring of God in the sense that Man inherits the previous thoughts and experiences of God as one’s own experiences.


As shall be explained in more detail in Part Two (“The Psychic “Ocean” of the Unconscious Mind of God: The Hard Problem of the Structure of God’s Mind”), the existence of beings other than a Pantheopsychic God in Pantheopsychic Solipsism requires the first-person subjective experience that makes up God to assume forms and shapes that are non-intersubjective with the indigenous mind of God. That is, in the way the consciousness of another person is non-intersubjective with another human (one can experience one’s own experiences but not that of the person standing nearby), the existence of non-God beings depends upon the God-substance forming consciousnesses that are non-intersubjective with the indigenous consciousness of the External Person.

Strictly speaking, for the purposes of the invariance principle we must require that for two systems to share their functional organization, they must be in corresponding states at the time in question; if not for this requirement, my sleeping twin might count as sharing my organization, but he certainly does not share my experiences. When two systems share their organization at a fine enough grain (including the requirement that they be in corresponding states), I will say that they are functionally isomorphic systems, or that they are functional isomorphs. The invariance principle holds that any functional isomorph of a conscious system has experiences that are qualitatively identical to those of the original system.

-David J. Chalmers, Absent Qualia, Fading Qualia, Dancing Qualia

Non-intersubjectivity, however, does not negate isomorphism (“identical twinning”) of consciousness between God and Man. Isomorphism of consciousness is the Humean contiguity that infers the existence of causality or the invariable causal flow in the direction of God (upstream) to Man (downstream). Without isomorphic experience (the experiences of Man being “clones” or “identical twins” of the previous experiences of God (in one of three personalities and one of three states of consciousness), there is no meaningful connection between God and Man save the inconceivable concept and belief that “God created Man”.

In Pantheopsychic Inheritism it is logically impossible for man to have prior eternal existence, if the experiences of man are “hand-me-downs” of previous God-experiences. In the two possible worlds of Pantheopsychic Solipsism and Pantheopsychic Inheritism, it turns out that the logical possibility of Pantheopsychic Inheritism depends upon the previous existence of Pantheopsychic Solipsism.

Primordial Pantheopsychic Solipsism preceding Pantheopsychic Inheritism is necessary for the compilation of psychic data necessary to pad out a narrative of the extensive experiences of non-God beings that are formed by the God-substance that mimic and replicate the previous experiences of a previously solipsistic God.

Jesus answered and said, “It is written: ‘Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

-Matthew 4:4

Matthew 4:4 in Pantheopsychic Theology entails God spending eons having certain types of experiences, before the God-substance shifts shape from just the consciousness of God to a multitudinous consciousness of a vast population of non-intersubjective beings that non-linearly re-enacts or replicates the content of God’s previous solipsistic, linear experience.

While Man replicates the previous “batch” “cooked” by God for the past several eons, God exists outside these multitudinous replicating Matrix-worlds as He “cooks” a new “batch” of “psychic cookies” for man to digest (re-enact and replicate) when the previous and current experiences of Man exhaust. God must continually provide our experiences for all eternity or Man would cease to exist in an instantaneous reversion of Pantheopsychic Inheritism to Pantheopsychic Solipsism.

(Note: In Pantheopsychism things do not come into nor go out of existence, in the sense of something existing suddenly no longer existing at all: things ‘cease to exist’ in the sense of transforming into something other than its previous self. Man ceasing to exist if God were to stop forming man’s experiences would entail only the transformation of the multiple consciousness of man in Pantheopsychic Inheritism into the singular consciousness of God in Pantheopsychic Solipsism.)

The content of God’s consciousness that man non-linearly re-enacts depends upon the dominant “alter” of the three personalities of God responsible for content and the state of consciousness of the personality responsible for the content of replicating Man. Indeed, the content of consciousness of Man is an amalgamation of the content of consciousness of the three personalities of God in three states of consciousness (Full Wakeful Awareness, Lucid Dreaming, and Non-Lucid Dreaming).



In Pantheopsychic Theology, the infinite Mind of God is divided into two “hemispheres”:

1. The Conscious Psychic “Continent” of God

—that floats alone in—

2. The Unconscious Psychic “Ocean” of God

I. The Psychic “Continent” of the Conscious Mind of God: The Easy Problem of the Structure of God’s Mind

First, when we analyze our thoughts or ideas, however compounded or sublime, we always find that they resolve themselves into such simple ideas as were copied from a precedent feeling or sentiment. Even those ideas, which, at first view, seem the most wide of this origin, are found, upon a nearer scrutiny, to be derived from it. The idea of God, as meaning an infinitely intelligent, wise, and good Being, arises from reflecting on the operations of our own mind, and augmenting, without limit, those qualities of goodness and wisdom.

-David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

Hume, however, assumes that God may not exist (or Hume may have believed in God but entertains the logic of what entails imagination of the qualities of God if God did not exist), such that God is a percept in the form of a figment of the imagination imagines as the fundamental structure of human consciousness expanded to infinite size, and the positive qualities of man expanded to limitlessness.

If the external world is not a limitless non-consciousness composed space but the only-consciousness-composed mind of the Judeo-Christian God (as one of many logical and metaphysically possible forms of the external world, the logical and metaphysical possibility, once again following Hume, found in the existence of the human mind), the external world or infinity itself consists of two elements: the conscious mind or working memory of God and the unconscious mind of God which functions as the reservoir of the previous content of the mind of God.

In what may be argued to be the simplest (or one of the simplest) of all possible worlds:

  1. Nothing comes into nor goes out of existence.

  2. Given that existence as it actually demonstrates itself demonstrates itself only in the form of a person and that which the person experiences and persons are composed of subjective experience, existence only consists of subjective experience and as such there does not exist that which is not/is other than subjective experience.

  3. In the non-existence of Atomism, existence exists only in the form of complete persons.

  4. As Existence only contains and exists in the form of persons, the external world itself must be a Person having the dual mental forms of Conscious and Unconscious Mind (though the existence of an unconscious mind is not necessary, as opposed to the necessary existence of the conscious mind).

The Introcosm

An interesting fact about human consciousness is that one can divide human consciousness (as opposed to the unconscious mind) into: b The Visual Dimension and (2) The Introcosm.[/b]

That is, one can divide human consciousness into just visual perception and the content of visual perception, and the content of non-visual perception, which comprises the Introcosm.

Modern psychodynamic theory is concerned with the introcosm (Jaynes, 1977), the vast subjective psychological space that is the storehouse of personal experience within each of us. Central to its theoretical formulations is the self in all its senses, and especially the ways in which it emerges, is experienced, and often becomes embattled and defended (Winnicott, 1971; Kohut, 1971. 1977).

-David L. Rosenhan & Martin E.P. Seligman, Abnormal Psychology

Dividing one’s consciousness in this manner is significant primarily (if only) in the observation of the nature of consciousness in terms of the uncontrollable change of content of consciousness. Human consciousness is fundamentally a central subject of experience experiencing itself experiencing seven types or examples of the seven types of consciousness at any moment in time the subject is not dreamlessly sleeping (if dreamless sleep exists).

The content or examples of the seven type of consciousness continually change from moment to moment. In general, all content of consciousness change in a process ranging from next-moment difference between past and present experience with present experience being different but slightly dissimilar to the experience of the recent past, with experience changing from slight dissimilarity to complete, unrelated difference.

That is, one has a particular experience “now”, but the experience one will have a second or minute in the future will be different from the experience one has “now”, though this future experience will have similarities (provided one does not immediately fall asleep or be forced into rapid movement away from one’s present location) to the past “now” experience. The future usually involves a gradual change from slight dissimilarity but relative similarity between a “now” experience” and an “immediate future” experience to complete, unrelated difference between a “now” experience and a “not-so-immediate” to “relatively distant future” experience.

That is, unless on deliberately maintains a particular visual perception for a longer than normal amount of time, like staring at a wall for hours on end.

Here, visual perception can be argued to either not change in the manner described above, or change only in the most infinitesimal of ways (though visual change occurs even here). If we let one performing the feat of staring at the same section of wall without shifting bodily position for even a single hour the strength of the argument that it is possible to “freeze” time in terms of having identical visual perception over a period of time…

…one can concede to the ability to deliberately “freeze” perception so that visual perception can remain identical (or virtually identical) for longer than usual, while continuing the (easily demonstrable) argument that visual perception does not “freeze” when it comes to natural visual existence, that is,the autonomous visual perception of normal consciousness and “fate”, so to speak, independent of a person deliberately halting the river of fate (or unusually instituting this aspect of one’s fate which for those denying free will the halting of the usual change of experience from one moment to the next is nevertheless the person’s fate existing in this unusual form) staring at the same object for long periods of time to prevent autonomous natural visual change.

The Introcosm Is Uncontrollable

Nevertheless, even if one is capable of preventing (or virtually preventing) the ability of visual perception to change in content from one moment to the next by deliberately staring at the same visual object or space through several moments, one has no such control over the Introcosm.

The Introcosm, and this can be introspectively observed in oneself, is uncontrollable, as it is not subject to a person’s will and must change against a person’s will, even if and while a person “freezes” or halts change of visual perception. One cannot “freeze” one’s thoughts to maintain the same thought past, one can argue, a few seconds, and certainly one cannot maintain the same thought longer than a minute (though some may try); one cannot maintain the same emotion for longer than a minute (save perhaps ennui but even here “fate” will bring about something that will shift ennui to something more interesting in a short amount of time), and one certainly cannot “freeze” bodily sensations or non-visual perceptions such as audition, as audition more than any other non-visual perception is a product of ever-changing environment or “fate”.

The same qualities or inability to “freeze” the Introcosm or non-visual perception, as an interesting but invariable property of the consciousness of man can be imaginatively extended to be a property of God (although one may suppose God has no interest in experimentally “freezing” His visual perception).

The (conceptually) apparent nature of the conscious mind of God following the apparent structure of the nature of the consciousness of man is simply the content of the mind of God involved in the evolving drift of working memory and certain types or examples of the seven types of conscious experience occurring to God in a sequence flowing from past, to present, to future. The content of the mind of God, however (prior to its replication in the mind of man in Pantheopsychic Theology and, it is suspected, normative Paulian theology), remains unknown.

How unsearchable are His judgments,
and untraceable His ways!
Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has ever been His counselor?

-Romans 11:33-34