Note 39. To the Subsection “Ontology of Unification Thought”
Here, I will explain further about a proof for the existence of God. Since Unification Thought is a theory based on God, we should necessarily offer some proof of His existence.
A. Traditional Arguments to Prove the Existence of God
(1) Ontological Argument
This is a method of proving God’s existence based on the concept of God held by human beings. For example, Anselm (1033-1109) in his Proslogium (Words toward God) asserted that “It is because God exists that human beings understand God as the most perfect being. If God does not possess the attribute of existence, then He can not be seen as the most perfect being. Therefore, God must exist.” This method of proof was also used by Ren Decartes.
However, with this proof, it is difficult to overcome the refutation of atheists like Feuerbach that “God is nothing but the objectification of the human speciesessence and desire for perfection.”
(2) Cosmological Argument
This refers to a proof proposed by Thomas Aquinas (1224-75). He asserted that if we trace back the causal relationships of the movements of the physical world, we will finally reach the ultimate cause, namely, the first cause, which is the original mover, or self cause. He recognized this as God. This method of proof was established based on Aristotle’s methodology, in which he recognized an unmoved mover. Nonetheless, it is difficult to persuade atheists and materialists using this method. They argue that there is no compelling reason why the first cause, as the ultimate cause of the material causal relationships, must be God.
Materialists (atheists) make the point that regardless of how one traces the cause of matter back, it can never be anything other than matter. They assert that even if the first cause of the universe is said to be God, then God must be a material being.
(3) Teleological Argument
This is a method of proving the existence of God using the following argument: “Just as the structure and physiology of the human body seemingly assume purposefulness, so too the universe, which is composed of innumerable heavenly bodies, is a huge system of order formed in accordance with a specific purposive plan. When we consider it in this way, the planner must be God.” Another argument is that “From the beauty and solemnity of the natural world, we can not but admit that God with His supreme wisdom created the world.”
However, this method of proof also faces difficulty in overcoming atheism or materialism, because atheists believe that the movement of the universe can be explained solely through the inevitability of laws. It is the atheistic viewpoint that for teleology to consider the phenomena of the universe to be purposive simply because the structure and movements of the human body are purposive, is a jump in logic. Atheists hold that the movement of the universe is completely law-governed.
(4) Moral Argument
This is a method of proof by way of recognizing God’s existence as the source of the moral laws that human beings follow in their daily life, and as the source of moral world order. It is also the method, used especially by Kant, of proving the existence of God based on the moral imperative, that is, the necessary criterion for a moral life. The standpoint whereby one regards the conscience as being God’s voice also falls into this category. However, this kind of theory also fails to persuade atheists, especially Marxists, because they consider traditional morality and ethics as mere carry-overs from a previous feudal society, or feudal norms created by the ruling class in order to maintain and consolidate their class rule. When considered in this way, these traditional proofs for God’s existence are seen to be little more than logical fortifications for belief in God’s existence, valid only when there is a prior belief in God. In other words, they are proofs assuming a theistic position to start with.
Therefore, such proofs of God can not make a common base with atheism and these two positions will remain as far apart as ever. In other words, in order to persuade atheists to recognize God’s existence, it is essential to develop one’s logic in such a way that they can relate to it. This requirement is met, I believe, by the effort to prove God’s existence using the hypothetical method. Let me explain about this method.
B. Hypothetical Method
A hypothesis has to do with an assumption or speculation formulated in order to explain a certain thing or phenomenon, the certainty of the truth or falsehood of which has not yet been proven through any empirical method.
The hypothetical method, then, refers to a way or method of proving that the hypothesis is true by verifying it through scientific observations or experiments. A very common example of this is when a medical doctor cures a patient’s illness. First, he will speculate as to what the cause of that illness might be (for example, in assuming an illness with a high fever to be influenza, based on observed symptoms), and then he will prescribe a cure for that illness (influenza) based upon his assumption. If the patient’s illness is cured, that diagnosis will have been proven to be a correct diagnosis, and if not, that diagnosis will have been shown to be a wrong diagnosis.
The same thing can be said about the hypothetical method. Let me cite an example from natural science. The ancient Greek philosopher Democritus (ca.460-370 BC) claimed that all matter is composed of minute particles called atoms that can not be further divided.
This claim was not obtained from any natural scientific observation or experimentation, but was merely a hypothesis. However, in the contemporary period, now that science is so developed, even the weight and internal structure of the minute particles composing matter are being clarified; thereby, his atomic theory has come to be officially recognized as a true theory, verified scientifically.
This kind of example can also be found in the discovery of the atomic elements. D. I. Mendeleev (1834-1907), who first laid out the periodic table of the elements, predicted through this table the atomic weights, atomic numbers, and characteristics of several atoms that had not yet been discovered. Later, in 1886, C. A. Winkler actually discovered germanium, one of the atoms predicted by Mendeleev. This is another example in which a hypothesis is first set up, and then becomes an established theory through consequent verification.
Thus, a hypothesis is first established concerning something which is not yet recognized scientifically. If the conclusion derived from that hypothesis can be verified through scientific observations and experiments, then that hypothesis can be considered as a recognized, true theory. In many cases in the history of the development of science, theories have been affirmed as correct through the hypothetical method. The atomic theory is one such example.
In this way, the hypothetical method can be regarded as a way, recognized by natural science, to inquire after truth, one that can be, or should be, acknowledged by atheists as well. This same principle can be applied to the hypothetical deductive method of the proof of the existence of God. In other words, if a proof for God’s existence were offered using this hypothetical method, and subsequent investigation confirmed its veracity, then atheists would be obliged to seriously consider it.
In order to prove the existence of God through the hypothetical method in Unification Thought, we may first propose that an atheist consider the theory concerning the attributes of God (the Theory of the Original Image) as a hypothesis, then they can be challenged to participate in the attempt at verification, namely, a comparison of the conclusion obtained from the hypothesis with the results of various experiments and observations made by natural scientists. If they can then find themselves in complete agreement with the experimental results, then the Theory of the Original Image should be recognized as a true, established theory and they would be obligated to lend their consent. This is the hypothetical method. Let me explain it with some examples.
The essential parts of the Theory of the Original Image are, first, that “God is the harmonious Subject of the dual characteristics of Sungsang and Hyungsang, and at the same time the harmonious Subject of the dual characteristics of Yang and Yin, where Yang and Yin are the attributes of Sungsang and Hyungsang.” A second part is that “centering on the purpose of creation, God created all things through give and receive action, and this takes place on the basis of the four position foundation, which consists of four types: inner and outer four position foundations, and identity-maintaining and developmental four position foundations.”
Atheists will not accept this theory concerning the attributes of God, if it is simply presented as dogma. Therefore, especially for them, the Theory of the Original Image may be treated as a hypothesis, and they can be asked to consider the verification of the hypothesis. That is, together we can examine whether the conclusion derived from the hypothesis is in agreement with the results of scientific experiments and observations. As mentioned above, the hypothetical method is a scientific method of pursuing truth; therefore, if atheists refuse even the verification of the hypothesis, that will mean that they are abandoning or evading the pursuit of truth, thus revealing their unscientific attitude. Therefore, they would be obliged to acknowledge the verification.
Strictly speaking, any verification of the hypothesis should be carried out through direct scientific experiments and observations by the advocate of the hypothesis. Today, however, with our highly developed natural sciences, such efforts are not necessary. All we have to do is compare already established scientific achievements with the conclusion of the hypothesis, and make a judgment as to whether or not they are in agreement. To invite atheists to attend to the verification of the hypothesis means to consider, together with them, whether or not natural scientific facts and the hypothetical conclusions are in agreement. If it can be conclusively shown that scientific facts and the propositions of the Theory of the Original Image are in agreement, then even atheists would be obliged to accept the Theory of the Original Image as a plausible counterproposal to atheism.
In this way, if the conclusion obtained from a hypothesis is in accord with the experiments and observations of the natural sciences, then that hypothesis can become a true, established theory. Next, let me explain how the Theory of the Original Image, once accepted as a hypothesis, can become an established theory through verification, citing some examples.
(1) Verification of the Dual Characteristics of Sungsang and Hyungsang
i) Hypothesis
Let us accept the following assertion of the Theory of the Original Image as a hypothesis for the time being: “God is the harmonious Subject of Sungsang and Hyungsang. All things, which were created according to the law of likeness, resemble God; therefore, they are united beings of the dual characteristics of Sungsang and Hyungsang.”
ii) Conclusion
From this hypothesis, the following conclusion can be obtained: “All created beings resemble God’s dual characteristics of Sungsang and Hyungsang; therefore, they are endowed, without exception, with an invisible Sungsang aspect and a visible Hyungsang aspect. That is to say, all created beings, including minerals, plants, animals, and human beings, possess these Sungsang and Hyungsang aspects without exception.”
Accordingly, what is required next is to verify whether or not this conclusion is in accord with the facts of the natural sciences, namely, the results of experiments and observations.
iii) Verification
Verification in this case is to confirm through scientific analysis whether or not human beings, animals, plants, and minerals all do have the correlative aspects of Sungsang and Hyungsang. In fact, we can see that this conclusion is in complete agreement with scientific facts.
In present-day medical science, a human being is regarded as a union of mind and body, and research is being conducted on the mutual relationship between the two aspects. This field is being covered by psychosomatic medicine, psychophysics, psychic physiology, and so on. Spirit or mind is Sungsang, and the body is Hyungsang. In this way, medical science today is showing that a human being is, in fact, a union of Sungsang and Hyungsang, thus resembling the dual characteristics of God.
It has been clarified by such sciences as animal psychology, that there is a part in animals which corresponds to the human mind. A neurophysiologist, John Eccles, said, based on his experiments, that animals (mammals) also have consciousness in the same way that humans do, and that the only difference between humans and animals is that humans have self-consciousness, whereas animals do not. This scientifically proves that animals have minds, even though it may be of a lower dimension. It goes without saying that animals have bodies, as do humans. Thus, animals are also the unions of Sungsang and Hyungsang, resembling the dual characteristics of God.
Plants are also living beings, as are animals. Life activity is a physiological phenomenon, and the science which studies this phenomenon is physiology. The physiology which deals with plants is called plant physiology. Life is not material, but has the invisible function of responding to environmental stimuli; therefore, it is similar to animal instinct in its function of responding to environmental stimuli. The two functions are different only in dimension. Botany includes such fields as plant anatomy, morphological botany, and so on, which deal with the physical, visible aspects of plants, including cells, tissues, and structures. Thus, we see that plants also have a functional, invisible aspect and a visible, physical aspect. Therefore, we can verify, through science, that plants also have the two aspects of Sungsang and Hyungsang, resembling the dual characteristics of God.
Since minerals are inorganic and lifeless material beings, they may seem to have no Sungsang aspect. But this is not so at all. The Sungsang aspect in minerals refers to their properties or functions. In order to find out whether minerals have invisible properties or functions, what we have to do is examine the scientific achievements concerning the constituents of minerals, in other words, atoms and molecules. Every atom has its definite atomic weight and definite chemical properties. The periodic table of the elements illustrates this graphically.
Also, every atom or molecule has the potential to exert a definite force. This potential is the function of an atom or a molecule. For example, an atomic nucleus has the potential to cause a nuclear reaction. The energy emitted at this time is the atomic force. A molecule also has its potential to exert an intermolecular force. A potential or a function is invisible; therefore, it is the Sungsang element. On the other hand, an atom or a molecule has its visible aspect. The visible aspect of an atom is its atomic structure, which is dealt with in atomic theory. Also, a molecule has a molecular structure as its visible aspect, which is dealt with in the theory of molecular structure. Thus, an atom or a molecule has its Hyungsang aspect as well. Atoms and molecules combine together to form minerals. It is confirmed, therefore, through scientific achievements that minerals are also unions of Sungsang and Hyungsang, resembling the dual characteristics of God.
From the above explanation, I think it should be quite clear that even though God is invisible, and thus can not, per se, become an object of research for the natural sciences, the existence of God can be persuasively argued for through the hypothetical method, which is a scientific method.
(2) Verification of the Dual Characteristics of Yang and Yin
i) Hypothesis
In the Theory of the Original Image, there is an assertion that “God is the harmonious Subject of the dual characteristics of Yang and Yin, and all things created according to the law of likeness exist in a correlative relationship of Yang and Yin, resembling the dual characteristics of God.” If this is regarded as a hypothesis, the following conclusion can be derived.
ii) Conclusion
It may be concluded that “every created being is endowed with the correlative attributes of yang and yin, and it is engaged in correlative relationships of yang and yin with other created beings, in resemblance to the dual characteristics of Yang and Yin of God.” Therefore, whether this conclusion agrees with scientific facts or not should be examined.
iii) Verification
Let us see to the verification of the conclusion which is based on our hypothesis. We concluded that “every created being exists with another created being in a correlative relationship of yang and yin.” In human beings, for instance, yang is a man, and yin is a woman. The difference between man and woman is clearly expressed anatomically (skull, pelvis, sexual organs, etc.), physiologically (voice, hormones, etc.), and in appearance (face, breasts, hips, etc.). The yang and yin in animals are male and female animals, and the difference between male and female animals is well expressed anatomically and physiologically. The yang and yin in plants are expressed as stamen and pistil, a male type tree and a female type tree, namely, a tree bearing fruit and a tree bearing no fruit (in the case of a ginkgo), and a male type flower and a female type flower.
Let me offer another example. In the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) molecule, which contains the genes of a living being, there are two pairs of nitrogenous bases: the A-T pair and the G-C pair. The two base pairs serve as the connections or rungs between the two chains of the double helix, which is made of sugars and phosphates. It is known that the relationship between A and T, or G and C is a complementary relationship, as if one were a positive picture, and the other a negative picture. This can easily be understood as a relationship of yang and yin.
Next, let us examine minerals. As I have mentioned, the constituents of minerals are atoms, which, as atomic physics has made clear, are composed of the nucleus (which consists of protons and neutrons) which carries positive charges, and electrons, revolving around the nucleus, which carry negative charges. That is, minerals exist with yang and yin elements within themselves.
Thus, it seems that the hypothetical conclusion that “every created being exists with another created being in the correlative relationship of yang and yin” is in agreement with the results of research in the natural sciences (medical science, zoology, botany, atomic physics, etc.), and that, therefore, the hypothesis that “God exists as the harmonious Subject of Yang and Yin dual characteristics,” and “all things created according to the law of likeness exist in a correlative relationship of yang and yin, resembling the dual characteristics of God,” receives solid support in being considered as a true, established theory.
The same thing can be said with regard to the other central tenets of the Theory of the Original Image: “Centering on the purpose of creation, God created all things through the give and receive action between Sungsang and Hyungsang. This give and receive action takes place on the basis of the four position foundation, which can be divided into four kinds, namely, inner and outer, identity-maintaining and developmental four position foundations.” First, this assertion is regarded as a hypothesis, then a conclusion may be derived from it, and finally the conclusion may be verified with scientific facts. Due to spatial limitations, and since one can easily understand the argument if one examines the explanation of the “Structure of the Original Image” in the Theory of the Original Image, I will here omit the verification of this hypothesis. With this, nevertheless, I am convinced that it has been clarified that the “existence of God” can be asserted most correctly using the hypothetical method of Unification Thought.
I would like to add one final point here before I end and that is that no matter what kind of atheist one may claim to be, once a theory concerning God has been verified as being in accord with scientific fact through the hypothetical method, the proper scientific attitude commensurate with that would be to accept the theory as true with a humble heart. Since Communists and materialists, in particular, have long denied God, it would seem that they are steeped in a mindset which opposes or rejects “God” unconditionally. However, they should come to realize that such an inflexible attitude of unconditional rejection is highly unscientific.
The way to fundamentally solve the great confusion of today’s world is to pull down the banners of atheism from the face of the earth and raise high the banner of God. As human beings become one under the banner of God, an ideal world of love, freedom, prosperity and peace, which has long been the dream of humankind, can finally become a reality.