The Elegant Simplicity of Idealism

The best explanations of the world are not only the most accurate, they’re as simple as possible.

There is an elegant simplicity to Einstein’s e=mc2, and yet it encapsulates a profound truth. This principle of explanatory simplicity is called parsimony.

According to modern propaganda, naturalism is the simplest explanation of the world. It’s claimed that we know the natural world exists, so that should be our starting point. To assume there’s anything beyond nature, anything super-natural, is an unnecessary and unwarranted assumption.

But when naturalism’s claim to simplicity is critically analysed, we find the opposite is true.

Naturalism is a convoluted and extravagant explanation.

If simplicity is our criteria, then we should all be idealists, not naturalists. Idealism should be our starting point, because that’s what we observe to be true. Idealism not only is our starting point, it’s also our end point and all points between.

Observing the facts

The only thing we know are our conscious states, our experiences of the world. These states are self-evident, we don’t need any other evidence to demonstrate they exist.

Consciousness is self-luminous. If we turn on a lamp in a dark room, the light illuminates everything. We don’t need a light to see the lamp-light. In the same way, we don’t require some other confirmation to know our conscious states exist, we’re directly acquainted with them.

The existence of our consciousness is undeniable. The act of denying is a state of consciousness, which means consciousness must already exist to do the denying.

We can never get outside of consciousness or go beyond it. The conscious self is more fundamental than even knowledge of the world. Like the light source, consciousness is the source and foundation of all knowledge.

Consciousness is the necessary precondition for any knowledge whatsoever. The existence of consciousness is logically prior to any estimation of reality. It’s only by consciousness that anything can be known.

These are the observed facts. This is our starting point.

To assume there is some other stuff we call matter, which exists independently of consciousness, and causes consciousness; is an unnecessary and unwarranted assumption.

It’s also impossible to verify the truth of such a claim, we can’t get outside consciousness to know this theoretical “other” world. It’s not what we observe to be the case, and it’s not justified by logic.

Naturalism extravagantly assumes the existence of another world

Naturalism assumes the “real” world is something radically different from the world of our experience. This real world is the world science describes. A silent, colourless, and odourless world of particles and fields.

In this theoretical real world, apples aren’t red, roses have no scent, and rainbows aren’t colourful.

If that isn’t radical enough, naturalism goes even further. It says that this other world, which is nothing like your experience of it, exists independently of your experience, but is also the ultimate cause of those experiences.

For the naturalist, our experiences are only representations of the world, not what is really out there. Our experiences are inaccurate pictures of the world constructed by our brains.

What you’re aware of isn’t the world as it is, but instead, a hallucination constructed by the brain to represent the real world.

All the colours, smells, tastes, and sounds are imaginary qualities confined to a Cartesian movie theatre playing in your head.

Naturalism assumes an entire additional world, which is nothing like the one you see, hear, taste, touch, and smell. This is a world you can never directly access, it will always remain a theoretical world.

But naturalism says this other world is the real world.

By contrast, idealism thinks this is unnecessary rigmarole and a denial of what is self-evidently true. Idealism accepts that your experiences of the world are accurate. The external world really does have colours, tastes, smells, and sounds.

It’s the idealist who affirms what is both self-evidently true and the simplest explanation of the observed facts about the world.

People misunderstand idealism

Many people don’t realise the explanatory merits of idealism because they think idealism denies the reality of an external world. They think if reality is mental, the world must be only in our minds.

But this is a misunderstanding. The idealist accepts the reality of the external world, but says the fundamental nature of the world is mental. It’s actually the naturalist who says the world of your experience is only in your mind.

According to idealism, there really is a world out there, your experience of it is accurate, and the fundamental nature of that world is mental.

Idealists accept the self-evident fact of our experience and assume the world really is like that. For the idealist, going beyond consciousness isn’t justified by logic or experience. We can’t go outside consciousness, it’s the only thing we know.

Even when we compare the merits of naturalism and idealism to see which is more likely to be true, we’re discussing competing ideas or concepts about the nature of the world. Nature is an idea, a state of consciousness.

Nature is a conceptual category we created to help us make sense of the world. The very act of explaining the world is to appeal to intelligibility.

Explaining the world in terms of concepts means our ontological primitives are mental. The concepts we use in thinking, are the same concepts we use in explaining the world. The idealist observes the nature of consciousness and accepts the logical consequences.

The world is fundamentally, and inescapably, grounded in mental states.

The decadent extravagance of naturalism

For naturalism to be true, we must also accept that the real world is radically different to the world of our experience. Not only is it radically different, it exists independently of our experience, and also causes our experience.

Naturalism proposes an entire duplicate world in addition to the one we know. This theoretical other world causes your experience of colours, sounds, and smells, but that world is colourless, silent and odourless.

Which means your experiences of the world are hallucinations. They exist only inside your head and are nothing like the real world.

It’s hard to think of a more extravagant, convoluted, and untidy explanation than that.

Contrast that with the simplicity of idealism. Idealism accepts that the real world has colours, sounds, smells and tastes. You’re not a ghost viewing a hallucination produced by the squishy grey matter in your skull.

You’re a conscious individual immersed in the experience of a wondrous and beautiful reality.

Simple, elegant and dignified.