A Summary of Unification Thought


Theory of the Original Image
I.   Content of the Original Image
II.  Structure of the Original Image
III. Traditional Ontologies and Unification Thought

Ontology: A Theory of Being
I. Individual Truth Being
II Connected Being

Theory of the Original Human Nature
I.   A Being With Divine Image
II.  A Being with Divine Character
III. A Being with Position
V. A Unification Thought Appraisal of the Existentialist Analysis of Human Existence

Axiology: A Theory of Value
I.   Meaning of Axiology and Significance of Value
II.  Divine Principle Foundation for Axiology
III. Kinds of Value
IV. Essence of Value
V. Determination of Actual Value and Standard of Value
VI.Weaknesses in the Traditional Views of Value
VII.Establishing the New View of Value
VIII.Historical Changes in the View of Value

Theory of Education
I.   The Divine Principle Foundation for a Theory of Education
II.  The Three Forms of Education
III. The Image of the Ideal Educated Person
IV. Traditional Theories of Education
V. An Appraisal of Traditional Theories of Education from the Standpoint of Unification Thought

I.   The Divine Principle Foundation for Ethics
II.  Ethics and Morality
III. Order and Equality
IV.Appraisal of Traditional Theories of Ethics from the Viewpoint of the Unification Theory of Ethics

Theory of Art
I.   The Divine Principle Foundation for the New Theory of Art
II.  Art and Beauty
III. The Dual Purpose of Artistic Activity: Creation and Appreciation
IV. Requisites for Artistic Appreciation
V. Technique, Materials, and Style in Artistic Creation
VI. Requisites for Artistic Appreciation
VII.Unity in Art
VIII.Art and Ethics
IX. Types of Beauty
X.  A Critique and Counterproposal to Socialist Realism

Theory of History
I.   The Basic Positions of the Unification View of History
II.  The Laws of Creation
III. The Laws of Restoration
IV. Changes In History
V. Traditional Views of History
VI. Comparative Analysis of Providential View, Materialist View, and Unification View

I. Traditional Epistemologies
II. Unification Epistemology
III. Kant's and Marx's Epistemologies from the Perspective of Unification Thought

I.   Traditional Systems of Logic
II.  Unification Logic
III. An Appraisal of Traditional Systems of Logic from the Perspective of Unification Thought

I.   Historical Review
II.  Unification Methodology - The Give-and-Receive Method
III. An Appraisal of Conventional Methodologies from the Perspective of Unification Thought

I.   Principle of Mutual Existence, Mutual Prosperity and Mutual Righteousness
II.  Three Great Subjects Thought
III. Significance of the Four Great Realms of Heart and the Three Great Kingships




1. Theory of the Original Image

1. A representative example of the reciprocal relationship is yang and yin, or man and woman. Exposition of the Divine Principle (hereafter cited as DP ) explains that the relationship between Sungsang and Hyungsang is, in a way, the same as that between Yang and Yin, or man and woman, as follows: i) “In this case, the yang and yin of God were manifested in masculinity and femininity” (DP , 19). ii) “Because God exists as the subject partner having the qualities of internal nature and masculinity, He created the universe as His object partner with the qualities of external form and femininity” (DP , 19). iii) God is the Subject in whom the dual characteristics of original internal nature and original external form are in harmony. At the same time, God is the harmonious union of masculinity and femininity, which manifests the qualities of original internal nature and original external form, respectively. In relation to the universe, God is the subject partner having the qualities of internal nature and masculinity” (DP , 19). Consequently, the relationship of Sungsang and Hyungsang, and the relationship between God and the creation are also the reciprocal relationships of yang and yin.

2. The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, Exposition of the Divine Principle (New York: HSA-UWC, 1996).

3. Paul A. Dirac, et al., Scientific American Resource Library: Readings in the Physical Sciences (Japanese version) (Tokyo: Kodansha), 1972, 79.

4. The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, Divine Principle (Korean version) (Seoul: Sunghwa-sa, 1987).

5. From around 1951, Werner Heisenberg (1901-76), the founder of quantum physics, dealt with the unified theory of elementary particles and advocated the idea of “prime-matter.” This theory asserts that the elementary particles that have been observed, of which there are approximately 300, have come into being from a prime-matter, the ultimate matter, following a cosmic equation expressed in a certain mathematical form. Heisenberg also said that “prime-matter” is the same as “prime-energy,” and that all the various kinds of elementary particles (therefore, all matter) of the universe consists of prime-energy. The prime-matter, or prime-energy, advocated by Heisenberg can be regarded as pointing to pre-matter, or pre-energy, as advocated by Unification Thought. Today it is known that all matter consists of quarks and leptons. Recently the “sub-quark” model has been advocated. This model states that quarks and leptons are made of even more basic particles, and active research is being conducted into that area. Specifically, the sub-quark model states that all matter is made of sub-quarks, and that there are three kinds of sub-quarks, which can be regarded as different states of a single sub-quark. If this theory is correct, it follows that all matter is made of a single, basic substance. This can be seen as a contemporary version of Heisenberg’s monistic unified model. For further reference, see Hidezumi Terasawa’s Sub-quark Physics and Original Geometry (in Japanese) (Tokyo, Kyoritsu Shuppan Sha,1982), 17-21.

6. The Universal Prime Force is acting on the created world, and the force of give and receive action is working between existing beings as the result of the operation of the Universal Prime Force. Therefore, the Universal Prime Force is the causal force operating on the created world; in other words, the Universal Prime Force and the force of give and receive action are in the relationship of cause and effect. (This note is added by the editor.)

7. Let me concretely explain about homogeneous elements and absolute attributes. One may raise the question: “Even though Sungsang and Hyungsang are two expressions of the homogeneous element, Sungsang itself and Hyungsang itself are different, aren’t they? For example, steam and ice are the two expressions of water (H2O). They are supposed to be essentially the same in that both have in them-selves the relative relationship between attraction and repulsion of water molecules. However, attraction and repulsion are different from each other. Likewise, even if it is claimed that Sungsang and Hyungsang are homogeneous in that Sungsang contains Hyungsang and Hyungsang contains Sungsang, aren’t Sungsang and Hyungsang themselves different from each other?”

   This question seems reasonable but, nevertheless, is shortsighted. It arises from one’s being unaware of the fact that the phenomenal world is somewhat different from the causal world. In fact, there is a difference between macroscopic phenomena and microscopic phenomena. For example, the principle of uncertainty says that, in the microscopic world, the position of the particle and its momentum can not be exactly determined at the same time through our observation. Also, light, or the photon, is known to have the two discrepant attributes of particle and wave at the same time. Such phenomena are not seen in the macro-scopic world. In other words, there are certain cases in which we can not understand microscopic phenomena in the same manner as we do when we think of the macroscopic world. This means that there are cases when we have to abandon our ideas and concepts formed in the macroscopic world in order to understand the microscopic world properly.

   A similar thing can be said about our knowledge of the attributes of God, the ultimate Cause. It is not always appropriate to apply our concepts of the phenomenal world to the causal world. In the above-mentioned example of ice and steam, I explained that the common element between them is the relative relationship between attraction and repulsion of water molecules. As for the question whether the attractive force and the repulsive force are essentially different or not, it will be properly answered if it is proven that both forces originate from a single force.

   Though it is not yet proven that the attractive force and the repulsive force originate from a single force, we will assume that the separation into two attributes from one attribute is possible in the causal world. For example, a photon, which belongs to the microscopic world, manifests itself as particle and wave. The photon, or light quantum, as named by A. Einstein, is “light” which has the united attributes. When a photon operates in the actual world, it shows one of the two characters according to the circumstances. In other words, the substance of light is one, but only manifests itself as one of its attributes.

   Light gives us brightness and heat. This does not mean that brightness and heat, which are separate qualities, are united in the light. Rather, a light is perceived as brightness and warmth through our sense of sight and sense of touch respectively. Likewise, we should understand that God’s Sungsang and Hyungsang are not essentially different attributes, but rather are one absolute attribute which has become separated into two correlative attributes in His creation. If Sungsang and Hyungsang were essentially heterogeneous attributes, give and receive action between them would not be possible.

   When I explain Sungsang and Hyungsang in this way, one may think that this is the same as the Identity-philosophy. The Identity-philosophy claims that the correlative elements in the phenomenal world-spirit and matter, or subject and object-originate from one and the same entity (the absolute). In contrast, the theory of homogeneity of Sungsang and Hyungsang is an argument in the realm of the Causal Being, namely, God. In God, there is no time; therefore, the relationship between the absolute and the relative attributes is not cause and effect. Hence, in God, the absolute attribute is at the same time a relative attribute. In this respect, it is quite different from the Identity-philosophy.

8. Unification Thought ontology is “Unification Theory” or “Theory of Oneness,” which is a kind of monism, a monism with dual characteri-stics. The Theory of Oneness is different in its character from the monisms of materialism and spiritualism (idealism). Materialism is a monism in the sense that it considers matter to be prior to spirit, and spiritualism is a monism in the sense that it considers spirit to be prior to matter. Hence, both materialism and spiritualism are relative monisms. In contrast, the Theory of Oneness claims that the origin of spirit and matter is one; therefore, it is an absolute monism.

9. A famous British theoretical physicist, David Bohm, explored the realm of consciousness and formulated his unique cosmology. He said, “If the immanence is pursued more and more deeply in matter, I believe we may eventually reach the stream which we also experience as mind, so that mind and matter fuse.” The Holographic Paradigm and Other Paradoxes, ed. Ken Wilber (Shambhala/Boston & London: New Science Library, 1985), 193. We can see that Bohm, while exploring the realm of consciousness from the perspective of a natural scientist, has reached the same conclusion as that of the Theory of Oneness advocated by Unification Thought.

10. Nicolas de Malebranche (1638-1715) applied Geulincx’s occasionalistic idea to epistemological questions. If spirit and matter are kinds of substances that are totally different from each other, how can spirit recognize matter? Malebranche explained that in God there are eternal ideas as the prototypes of things and that in recognizing things, we do not recognize things directly, but rather we recognize the ideas within God. On this point he said, “We see all things in God.” The consequence of this view is that we are relating ourselves ultimately to God, and the significance of the existence of matter diminishes. See Takeo Iwasaki’ s History of Western Philosophy (in Japanese) (Tokyo, Yuhikaku, 1975), 147.

11. Confucius, Confucian Analects, The Great Learning & The Doctrince of the Mean, trans. James Legge (New York: Dover Publications, 1971), 359.

12. In humans, the actualization of love means to show a warm heart to others, or to please others, and ultimately, to return joy to God. In order to show our warm heart to others, intellectual, emotional, and volitional activities are necessary in our real life. In other words, the goal of our intellectual, emotional, and volitional activities is the actualization of love.

13. In Exposition of the Divine Principle , the Universal Prime Force is explained as belonging to God (DP , 21), while in Explaining the Divine Principle (in Korean) (Seoul: Sejong Moonhwa-sa, 1957), Universal Prime Force is explained as belonging to the created world (p. 35). Between these, Unification Thought chooses the latter in order to more clearly distinguish between the force from God and the force among all things.

14. When we say that the Prime Force is a vertical force and the Universal Prime Force is a horizontal force, the concept of vertical and horizontal refers to the relation of cause and effect. Accordingly, the Universal Prime Force is a horizontal force in relation to the Prime Force, while it is a vertical force in relation to the force of give and receive action. (This note is added by the editor.)

15. The force of God’s love is manifested differently according to the hierarchical ranking of created beings. For human beings, God’s love manifests on a full scale.

16. Inner Sungsang and Inner Hyungsang may jointly be called “inner dual characteristics.” Also, if necessary, Sungsang and Hyungsang may be jointly called “outer dual characteristics.” Similarly, such concepts as “inner subject and object” and “outer subject and object” may also be established.

17. When a driver observes traffic rules, the driver does not do so obliged by force, but rather does so according to his or her free will and decision. Therefore, the relationship of freedom and necessity is one of subject and object.

18. A galvanometer is a machine used to detect a weak electric current. By attaching it to a human body, the change in a person’s thought or emotion can be detected through the measurement of the human body’s electrical potential, which is recorded on a graph. One day, on impulse, Cleve Backster, America’s foremost lie-detector examiner attached the electrodes of a polygraph (lie detector) to a leaf of his dracaena (a foliage plant) in his laboratory, and tried to observe any change which might occur in the galvanometer as a result of threatening the plant as he might threaten a human suspect. To his surprise, a dramatic change occurred in the movement of the needle of the galvanometer. The dracaena perceived Backster’s threat and responded to it. Later he made the same test on more than twenty-five different varieties of plants and fruits, and all the results were the same. It is concluded, therefore, that plants are sentient. Peter Tompkins & Christopher Bird, The Secret Life of Plants (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1973), 3-6.

19. Based on his theory of complex relativity, Jean E. Charon, theoretical physicist at the University of Paris, explained that electrons and photons themselves are microcosms equipped with mechanisms of memory and thinking. The theory of complex relativity, in which complex numbers are used, refers to an extension of the theory of relativity. A complex number consists of a real number and an imagi-nary number. In physics, natural phenomena are usually described within a four dimensional world of time and space using real numbers. In the theory of relativity as well, phenomena are described in the four dimensional world of time and space using real numbers. Yet, in the theory of complex relativity, the four dimensional world of time and space in imaginary numbers is added. Hence, phenomena are described in an eight dimensional world of time and space. It is possible for us to observe the real world of time and space, since it has a definite extension. On the contrary, the imaginary world of time and space is a “closed world” without extension; therefore, it is impossible to observe this world from the real world. However, Charon says that this imaginary world actually exists in the same way that our consciousness does. Thus, the universe consists of the real, material existence and the imaginary, spiritual existence, and we are beings that can perceive these two existences. Mitsuo Ishikawa, The Worldview of New Science (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Tama Shuppan, 1985), 176-79.

20. Dominion is, in principle, human dominion over all things in nature, but the concept of dominion can also be applied to human relation-ships, in which the subject rules or leads the object; for example, the relationship between a government and the people. In human relation-ships, the subject exercises dominion over the object with creativity and love.

21. When we mention the “reciprocal relationship between Sungsang and Hyungsang,” how can we reconcile it with the “essential homogeneity of Sungsang and Hyungsang”? In the section “Content of the Original Image” I explained about “the difference and homogeneity between Sungsang and Hyungsang,” and said that Sungsang and Hyungsang, as the correlative attributes in God’s creation, are essentially homoge-neous, since they are the two correlative attributes into which the absolute attribute has separated. Here, another question may be raised: If Sungsang and Hyungsang are essentially homogeneous, Sungsang is Hyungsang, and Hyungsang is Sungsang, and the formation of the reciprocal relationship, and the give and receive action between them would become impossible, wouldn’t it? This is not the case, however. When Sungsang and Hyungsang are separated from the absolute attribute and become correlative attributes, Sungsang and Hyungsang assume different attributes in addition to having common aspects; therefore, reciprocal relationships, and give and receive action between them, are possible.

22. It should be noted here that, as already explained, there are two kinds of result, union and a multiplied being. Union is realized when Sungsang and Hyungsang enter into give and receive action to be united into oneness; and a multiplied being is realized when Sungsang and Hyungsang enter into give and receive action, giving rise to a new individual or element.

23. The four position foundation was originally to be used as a spatial concept similar to the four directions of north, south, east and west. In actuality, however, it is also used as an abstract mental concept.

24. For example, the earth revolves around the sun while rotating itself, and an electron revolves around the nucleus while rotating itself. Here, rotation originates in the inner give and receive action, and revolution originates in the outer give and receive action.

25. In the Original Image, the center in the identity-maintaining four position foundation, or the center of the give and receive action whereby union is realized, is Heart, while the center in the develop-mental four position foundation, or the center of the give and receive action whereby a multiplied being is formed, is purpose (purpose of creation). In the created world, however, the center is purpose both in forming a union (identity-maintaining four position foundation) and in forming a multiplied being (developmental four position foundation). This is because, in created beings, both the formation of unity and the formation of a multiplied being are made in order to accomplish the purpose of creation. Needless to say, the purpose of creation is based on heart; therefore, the center is purpose and, at the same time, it is heart.

26. The inner identity-maintaining four position foundation and outer identity-maintaining four position foundation together form the two stage four position foundations, which is the “two-stage structure of the Original Image.”

27. From the viewpoint of the Divine Principle, development means the multiplication of an individual of new quality (namely, a new being). Development is equivalent to creation when creation is seen from the result. In fact, economic development is the multiplication of economic properties; cultural development is the multiplication of cultural properties, and scientific development is the multiplication of inventions and discoveries. All of these are productions made by give and receive actions based on four position foundations.

28. Not a few animals have creativity, though their creative abilities are of a lower level compared to those of humans. Bees, ants, spiders and magpies are such examples. Their creativity is instinctive, yet they also have the ability to form the inner developmental four position foundation, though at a lower level. In contrast, human creativity consists of instinctive and rational creativity.

29. The Inner Sungsang, as the union of intellect, emotion, and will also becomes a standard for the solution of an actual problem related to the problem of freedom: Is freedom a freedom of reason, of emotion, or of will? Divine Principle mentions “free will” or “free action” (DP , 74); therefore freedom is a freedom of will. In philosophy, freedom is often referred to as a freedom of will in the sense of a freedom of choice. Yet freedom, as Hegel claimed, is a freedom of reason; and freedom, as Kant claimed, is that humans obey moral laws unrestricted by sensuous desires; and the freedom of the late eighteenth century German philosophy of feeling is a freedom of feeling and faith.

   Thus, freedom seems to be a freedom of reason, or of emotion, or of will. Which one is correct? The Unification Thought view of the unity of intellect, emotion, and will, provides an answer to this problem. In this view, a freedom of reason is, and should be, at the same time a freedom of will, and a freedom of emotion. Let’s discuss freedom of choice. This is a freedom to decide by one’s own will; therefore, it is a freedom of will. (In this sense, “free will” as mentioned in the Divine Principle is correct.) When we choose something, however, we make a judgment as to which one is better. This is a freedom of reason. Also, when we choose something, we do so in such a way that we become pleased and do not become unhappy; therefore, freedom of choice is at the same time a freedom of emotion.

   Among the three views of freedom above, the most essential free-dom is that of reason. This is because one has to understand an object before one makes a choice, and then one gives a direction to one’s will, so that one may follow one’s decision. The ability to understand an object and the ability to give a direction to one’s will lies in one’s reason. As for emotional freedom, it is accompanied by esthetic judg-ment, which is also accompanied by factual and logical judgments. Therefore, the work of reason is also required.

30. What should be clarified here is that complex ideas (which are formed through the synthesis of various simple ideas), as well as simple ideas in the Inner Hyungsang, play the role of a spiritual mold. In human creative activity, a lot of moldings are made from a single mold, while in God’s creation of human beings, the role of each mold in His Inner Hyungsang ends when a person is created. Each mold is, in other words, an individual image in God.

31. This becomes the standard in solving another problem in logic. Traditional logic regards thinking as an established fact, and does not take into consideration such questions as why we should think, or in what direction we should think, in spite of the importance of such questions. As a result, traditional logic has come to a deadlock. These problems of logic can be solved through the theory of the inner developmental four position foundation in the Original Sungsang.

32. Here, the difference between pantheism and the Pan-Divine-Image Theory is explained in order to clarify that Unification Thought is not pantheism, but rather it is the Pan-Divine-Image Theory. Pantheism is the religious or philosophical view that regards all things in nature as being identical to or the representations of God; hence, it does not distinguish God from nature. Spinoza’s philosophy, Brahminist phi-losophy in ancient India, Buddhist philosophy, and some Egyptian or Greek philosophies are examples of pantheism. Pantheism gave rise to optimism, which recognizes divine nature in all things and regards all phenomena as good. On the other hand, pantheism gave rise to pessimism, since pantheism regards all things indiscriminately as the manifestations of God, and therefore any distinction between good and evil, or between true and false became meaningless, and thus the foundation for moral effort was lost. Needless to say, both optimism and pessimism are powerless in solving actual problems.

   It is because of the ignorance of God’s personality and His creation that pantheism is powerless in solving actual problems. Pantheists never considered such an idea as that of “Heart motivation” in God’s creation. As explained already, Unification Thought proposes “Heart motivation” and “creation in likeness”; therefore, it is possible for Unification Thought to fundamentally solve any difficult actual problem.Then, what is the Unification Thought view about panthe-ism? As mentioned above, Unification Thought is not pantheistic, but rather a Pan-Divine-Image theory. In Unification Thought, all things were created according to the law of likeness, centered on the purpose of creation. Hence, all things are not the direct manifestations of God, but rather they are created in the image of God, in other words, in the Divine Image of God. Hence, Unification Thought regards the relationship between God and all things as the relationship between the Creator and the created, the infinite and the finite, and the original being and the imitation; furthermore, Unification Thought regards the relationship between God and human beings as the relationship between parents and children.

33. In the Divine Principle it is written: The universe is formed by the multiplication of myriad substantial manifestations of God’s original internal nature and original external form through their give and take action in the pursuit of the purpose of creation (DP , 31).

34. Here, I can explain more concretely about the meaning of a living “idea-mold” or a “living mold.” An idea-mold is an idea which serves as a mold, or a model, in God’s creation. But, what does it mean to say that an idea is living? A living idea may be compared to the animation on a screen. However, an animation is not an actual living image; it is only a series of still images, for example, in a roll of film, projected onto a screen. However, a living idea-mold has life; therefore, it is literally alive. Let me offer a figurative explanation here as to a living idea-mold, although it may not be a completely appropriate example.

   We sometimes meet a person who claims to have met someone in his dream whom he had never seen before, and consequently, he actually meets the person about whom he dreamed. In this case, the person in the dream corresponds to a living idea-mold, and the real person corresponds to a being created in the way matter (pre-energy) is put into the idea-mold. Also, one might observe a scene including mountains, rivers, animals, and plants in their dream, and to their surprise, a few days later, he or she sees exactly the same scene on their actual trip. This may also serve as a helpful example enabling us to understand that there are, at first, idea-molds for all things, and then all real things are created when matter is put into them.

35. The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, Explaining the Divine Principle  (in Korean) (Seoul: Sejong Moonhwa-sa, 1957).

36. What should be clarified here is that there is a difference in the nature of the Inner Sungsang of Logos between the two cases: Logos with which human beings were created and the Logos with which all things were created. In the creation of all things, the Inner Sungsang of Logos consists of the lower level faculties of intellect, emotion, and will, whereas in the creation of human beings, the Inner Sungsang of Logos consists of both the higher level and lower level faculties of intellect, emotion, and will. When a human being is created, the lower level faculties of intellect, emotion, and will appear as the “physical mind,” the mind of the physical self, and the higher level faculties of intellect, emotion, and will, appear as the “spirit mind,” the mind of the spirit self.

37. It is written in the Divine Principle that everything reaches perfection by passing through three ordered stages of growth: the formation stage, the growth stage, and the completion stage (DP , 41-42). The three stages of growth originated from the number three in God, as it is written in the Divine Principle that “God is the one absolute reality in whom the dual characteristics interact in harmony; therefore, He is a Being of the number three” (DP , 41). This statement is the prototype for the four position foundation in which the center is the absolute, or Heart, the correlative elements of subject and object are engaged in the give and receive action, and the result is harmony or union; at the same time it is the prototype for the origin, division, and union action (Chung-Boon-Hap action) in which the absolute reality corre-sponds to origin, the dual characteristics correspond to division, and harmony corresponds to union.

38. Hirschberger states, “People like to call this pan-logism, and in relation to this pan-logism, they have regarded Hegel as the advocate of the mystical, pantheistic theory that all is one. Philosophers with scholastic inclinations have generally uniformly regarded Hegel as a philosopher of a pantheistic identity.” Geschichte der Philosophie (Freiburg: Verlag Herder, 1984), II., 419.

39. 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 species-essence 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 move-ments 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 com-posed of innumerable heavenly bodies, is a huge system of order formed in accordance with a specific purposive plan. When we con-sider 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 formu-lated 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 obser-vation 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 recog-nized, 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 Hyung-sang

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 physio-logy, 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 con-cerning 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 correl-ative 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 resem-blance 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 ana-tomically (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 nNeutrons) 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.

2. Ontology

1. Hiroshi Motoyama, Yoga and Parapsychology (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Shukyo-shinri Shuppan, 1972), 109.

2. The phenomenon of the direct influence of the will over matter is called “psychokinesis.” Through psychokinesis the will can move a distant object, can bend, extend, or harden a metal, and can even make a random-number generator lose its randomness. See Michel Cazenave, ed., Science et Conscience, trans. A. Hall and E. Callander (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1984), 49.

3. In 1966 Cleve Backster, an American lie-detector technician, examined the reactions of a plant by attaching the electrodes of a lie-detector to its leaves. To his surprise, Backster found that the plant was able to read his mind. For instance, when he pictured burning the leaves, the instant he pictured the flame in his mind, even before he moved to get matches, the plant reacted strongly. Subsequently, he conducted various experiments and concluded that plants seem to have consciousness and sense. This discovery by Backster is called the “Backster Effect.” See Peter Tompkins & Christopher Bird, The Secret Life of Plants (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1973), 3-5.

   Attempts to reproduce the kinds of communication between human beings and plants that Backster reported were also made in the Soviet Union. V. N. Pushkin and other researchers confirmed that plants react to the emotion of a person in a hypnotic state. See A. P. Dubrov & V. N. Pushkin, Parapsychology and Contemporary Natural Science (Moscow, 1983).

4. On this matter, David Bohm of London University said, “There may be a sort of living energy in all matter that manifests in us in certain ways which it does not do in the rock. If that were the case, if a sort of intelligence were generalized throughout nature, then the speculative proposal that inanimate matter might respond to our thought is not so illogical.” The Holographic Paradigm and Other Paradoxes, ed. Ken Wilber (Shambhala/Boston & London: New Science Library, 1985), 211.

   Also, Jean E. Charon, a theoretical physicist at Paris University, said that electrons and photons themselves are microcosms, equipped with mechanisms of memory and thinking. See Mitsuo Ishikawa, The World View of New Science (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Tama Shuppan, 1985), 178-79.

5. Traditionally, it had been considered that single-cell organisms (bacteria) were sexless; but in 1946, J. Lederberg and E. L. Tatum demonstrated that even bacteria engage in sexual reproduction. Concerning the sex of bacteria and paramecia, see, for example, Koichi Hiwatashi, The Search for the Origin of the Sex (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1986).

6. The Big Bang theory is still in the hypothetical stage, with the possibility that it may be revised in the future.

7. Joseph V. Stalin, Dialectical and Historical Materialism (New York: International Publishers, 1940), 7.

8. Friedrich Engels, Anti-Dühring (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969), 33.

9. Sang Hun Lee, The End of Communism (New York: Unification Thought Institute, 1985), chapter 3.

10. Here, let me explain the types of time for your reference. Divine Principle often mentions the providential periods of 21 days, 40 days, 210 years, 400 years, and so forth, in the providential history of restoration. Such providential periods are different from ordinary time-periods. In order to clarify this fact, the different types of time should be examined. There are five types of time as follows:

(1) Physical Time: This is the time observed in repetitive circular motion in non-living beings, caused by physical force.

(2) Biological Time: This is the time observed during the growth of living beings, and the repetition of the life cycle (the succession of generations), brought about by the life force.

(3) Historical Time: This is the time required in the formation and development of a culture, brought about by the human spirit.

(4) Providential Time: This is the time assigned for providential figures, in pursuit of their mission, to accomplish the providence of restoration with faith and through accomplishing their portion of responsibility.

(5) Ideal Time: This is the time necessary for the realization of true love, which is God’s ideal of creation. It is the time in which people are to realize the three great blessings.

Thus, there are five types of time. It can be said that most human beings living on earth, live in one or two, at the most, of these five types of time. The people who live without a sense of purpose or mission, but only for the sake of food, clothing, and shelter, and to feed their children, are living in biological time in much the same way that animals do. Those who are contributing to cultural development with their spirit are people who live in historical time. Those who are dedicating themselves to the realization of God’s providence to save humankind are the people who live in providential time. In the future, when God’s providence of restoration has been completed, and the ideal world has come, the whole of humankind will live in ideal time.

11. David Bohm speaks about the influence of a seed upon its environ-ment as follows: “According to the implicate order, the seed is continually providing inanimate matter in the environment with new information that leads it to produce the living plant or animal. Who is to say, then, that life is not immanent, even before the seed is planted?” The Holographic Paradigm and Other Paradoxes, 193.

12. Engels, Anti-Dühring, 75-76.

13. V.I. Lenin, “On the Question of Dialectics,” Collected Works, Vol. 38 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1976), 358.

14. Ibid.

15. If perfected human beings have a dominion of love over all things, even the phenomena of “the strong preying upon the weak” in the animal world will vanish.

3. Theory of the Original Human Nature

1. The Rev. Sun Myung Moon has stated this idea as follows: “For a man, his wife represents mother, elder sisters, younger sisters, and, indeed, all women of the world. To love a wife who has such significance means to love all races of humanity, all women, and one’s mother, elder sister, and younger sister in the home. Accordingly, the family is the ‘basic training’ center that educates people in human love. Therefore, to be trusted and to live a happy life in a family means to live a happy life as the center of the universe and to be situated at the center of happy love. There is nothing meaningful without love. Likewise for a woman, her husband represents father, elder brothers, younger brothers, and all men on earth. This is our ideal of the family.” God’s Will and the World (New York: The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, 1985), 446.

2. Confucius, The Analects, trans. D. C. Lau (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1979), 63.

3. Rev. Sun Myung Moon, “Founder’s Address (Fourteenth ICUS),” in Absolute Values and the New Cultural Revolution (New York: The International Cultural Foundation, 1985), 16.

4. F. Engels, “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific,” in Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works, vol. 3 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1970), 149.

5. John Locke states as follows: “Man being born, as has been proved, with a Title to perfect Freedom and an uncontrolled enjoyment of all the Rights and Privileges of the Law of Nature, equally with any other Man, or Number of Men in the World, hath by Nature a Power, not only to preserve his Property, that is, his Life, Liberty and Estate, against the Injuries and Attempts of other Men; but to judge of, and to punish the breaches of that Law in others, … even with Death itself.” Two Treatises of Government, ed. Peter Laslett (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 323-324.

6. Søren Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980), 13.

7. Søren Kierkegaard, The Present Age (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1962), 63.

8. Friedrich Nietzsche, “Thus Spake Zarathustra” in The Portable Nietzsche, ed. and trans., Walter Kaufmann (New York: Penguin Books, 1982), 226.

9. Friedrich Nietzsche, “The Antichrist” in The Portable Nietzshe, 570.

10. Friedrich Nietzsche, “Thus Spake Zarathustra” in The Portable Nietzsche, 329.

11. Nietzsche asserted in “The Antichrist” that Paul had changed “evangel” into “dysangel,” and Jesus’ teachings into a kind of teaching for after death. Nietzsche said as follows: “I tell the genuine history of Christianity. The very word ‘Christianity’ is a misunderstanding: in truth, there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross. The ‘evangel’ died on the cross. What has been called ‘evangel’ from that moment was actually the opposite of that which he had lived: ‘ill tidings,’ a dysangel” (The Portable Nietzshe, 612). He also said the following: “Paul simply transposed the center of gravity of that whole existence after this existence-in the lie of the ‘resurrected’ Jesus” (Ibid., 617).

12. Karl Jaspers, Philosophy, vol.1, trans. E. B. Ashton (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969), 56.

13. Karl Jaspers, Philosophy, vol. 2, 193-215.

14. Karl Jaspers, What is Philosophy? (Japanese version) (Tokyo: Hakusuisha, 1978), 22. Originally published as Was ist Philosophie? Ein Lesebuch, ed. Hans Sauer (Munich: R. Piper & Co. Verlag, 1976).

15. Ibid., 26.

16. Jaspers explains “the loving struggle” as follows: “The love in this communication is not blind love regardless of its object. It is the fighting, clear-sighted love of possible Existenz tackling another possible Existenz, questioning it, challenging it, making things hard for it.” Philosophy, vol. 2, 59-60.

17. Heidegger spoke of “they” (Das Man) as follows: “The ‘who’ is not this one, not that one, not oneself [man selbst], not some people [einige], and not the sum of them all. The ‘who’ is the nNeuter, the ‘they’ [Das Man].” Being and Time, trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson (Southampton: Basil Blackwell, 1962), 164.

18. Ibid., 320.

19. Jean-Paul Sartre, “Existentialism is a Humanism” in The Fabric of Existentialism, ed. R. Gill & E. Sherman (New York: Meredith Corporation, 1973), 523.

20. Ibid., 521.

21. Ibid., 522.

22. Jean-Paul Sartre, “Existentialism is a Humanism” in The Fabric of Existentialism, 523-524.

23. Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, trans. H. E. Barnes (New York: Washington Square Press, 1956), 373.

24. Ibid., 555.

4. Axiology: A Theory of Value

1. The Society for the Research of Teaching Materials of Philosophy, New Lectures on Philosophy (in Korean) (Seoul: Hakusa, 1978), 132.

2. Rev. Sun Myung Moon, New Hope-Twelve Talks by Sun Myung Moon, ed. Rebecca Salonen (New York: HSA-UWC, 1973), 55.

3. In Buddhism, the Three Realms refer to the three stages of the world where people live, die, and change, namely, the realm of desire, the realm of matter, and the realm of non-matter. The realm of desire is the lowest one; those who inhabit it are consumed by desires of carnal pleasure, food, and sleep. The realm of matter is located above the realm of desire and refers to the realm consisting of exquisite matter for those who have rid themselves of desire. The realm of non-matter refers to the highest stage and is a highly spiritual realm, transcending matter.

4. With regard to the universal standard, Rev. Sun Myung Moon said, “We must recognize that there is a universal principle involved, regardless of what race you are. You can see that the universe has certain fundamental laws, and anyone who violates them will be judged accordingly, regardless of his race or stature. What is the spirit of that constitution of the universe? It aims to preserve or uphold the men and women who try to live for others. It would also try to eliminate people who take advantage of others and seek to benefit only themselves. This is why we can say that good people are those who exist for the sake of others, and good deeds are those actions which benefit others.” God’s Will and the World (New York: HSA-UWC, 1985), 497.

5. The Rev. Moon’s consistent assertion at the International Conferences on the Unity of the Sciences is that absolute values should be pursued on the basis of absolute love.

6. Liberation Theology is a new theology that emerged in the less developed world. It departs from the traditional Christian view of salvation, and insists on active participation in resolving actual problems. Theology’s most important problem among actual problems is the dehumanization of people, and Liberation Theology asserts that the cause of this dehumanization lies in the structural contradictions and social evils of capitalist society. Accordingly, it asserts, in order to liberate human nature, that capitalist society must be overthrown; thus, it affiliates itself with Communism.

7. After World War II, the less developed world obtained independence politically; economically, however, it still depends on the developed world and can not get out of the state of underdevelopment. Dependency Theory grasps this situation as a relationship between central and peripheral nations, and interprets it as a projection, on an international scale, of the class confrontation of capitalist society. That is to say, just as the working class is exploited by the capitalist class, so the less developed countries are exploited by the developed countries-exploitation carried out through multinational corporations-it asserts. Therefore, in order for the less developed world to get out of its under-developed state, it must liberate itself from the developed countries and become socialist-and the way to do that is to expel multinational corporations, abolish all forms of dependency relations, and overthrow comprador capital and the authoritarian class.

8. Confucius says in The Great Learning: “Things being investigated, knowledge became complete. Their knowledge being complete, their thoughts were sincere. Their thoughts being sincere, their hearts were then rectified. Their hearts being rectified, their persons were cultivated. Their persons being cultivated, their families were regulated. Their families being regulated, their States were rightly governed. Their States being rightly governed, the whole kingdom was made tranquil and happy.” Confucian Analects, The Great Learning and The Doctrine of the Mean, trans. James Legge (New York: Dover Publications, 1971), 358-59. The Great Learning was part of The Book of Rites. Zhu Xi (Chu Hsi) characterized the Analects, Mencius, The Doctrine of the Mean, and The Great Learning as The Four Chinese Classics. It is said that The Great Learning is the work of one of Confucius’ disciples.

9. Confucius says in Confucian Analects, “Heaven produced the virtue that is in me” (Confucian Analects, The Great Learning and The Doctrine of the Mean, 202), which means that virtues are given by Heaven. Tung Chung-shu said that Heaven is jen (benevolence).

10. It is said that Tathagata is the “one who comes from Tathatā.” Also, one of the Buddhist sutras says that Tathagata has the great merciful heart that is found in every living being. Therefore, Tathatā can be regarded as the root of mercy, which is the fundamental virtue of Buddhism.

11. The Koran says: “Say: We belive in Allah and that which is revealed to us; in what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the tribes; to Moses and Jesus and the other prophets by their Lord. We make no distinction amongst any of them, and to Allah we have surrendered ourselves.” THE KORAN, trans. with notes. N.J. Dawood (New York: Penguin Books, 1974), 346.

12. The Exordium of the Koran, which is the Opening Chapter, contains the Seven Verses, which are called “the essence of the Koran,” as follows (Ibid., 15):




Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Creation,

The Compassionate, the Merciful,

King of Judgement-day!

You alone we worship, and to You alone

we pray for help.

Guide us to the straight path

The path of those whom You have favoured,

Not of those who have incurred Your wrath,

Nor of those who have gone astray.

13. Pascal wrote as follows: “Man without faith can know neither true good nor justice. All men seek happiness. There are no exceptions…. What else does this craving, and this helplessness, proclaim but that there was once in man a true happiness, of which all that now remains is empty print and trace? … None can help [him], since this infinite abyss can be filled only with an infinite and immutable object; in other words, God himself.” Pensées, trans. A. J. Krailsheimer (New York: Penguin Books, 1966), 74-75. He also wrote, “It is the heart which perceives God and not the reason. That is what faith is: God perceived by the heart, not by the reason” (Ibid., 154).

14. Dictionary of Philosophy (in Japanese), ed. Koichi Mori (Tokyo: Aoki Shoten, 1974), 61.

5. Theory of Education

1. Comenius gave the following subtitle to his book The Great Didactic:

The whole Art of Teaching

all Things to all Men


A certain Inducement to found such Schools in all

the Parishes, Towns, and Villages of every

Christian Kingdom , that the entire

Youth of both Sexes, none

being excepted, shall

;Quickly, Pleasantly, and Thoroughly

Become learned in the Sciences, pure in Morals,

trained to Piety, and in this manner

instructed in all things necessary

for the present and for

the future life,

K-John Amos Comenius, The Great Didactic, trans. M. W. Keatinge (New York: Russell and Russell, 1967), 1.

2. J. J. Rousseau, trans. Barbara Foxley, Ēmile (London: L.M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1974), 5.

3. Immanuel Kant, Education, trans. Annette Churton (The University of Michigan Press, 1960), 1.

4. Ibid., 6.

5. On intellectual education (mental education) and moral-religious education (heart education), Pestalozzi wrote the following:

“Originally, intellectual education is not at all suitable for producing innocence and child-like feelings within ourselves, which produce all the methods that enhance ourselves to higher, divine feelings. As a thorn does not bear figs and a thistle does not bear grapes, so mere spiritual education, separate from heart education, does not bear the fruit of love. Since spiritual education is a victim of the selfishness and weakness that arise as a result of this separation, it has the cause of degradation in itself, and exhausts itself by its own power, just as a flame burns out as soon as it is taken out of the fuel container.” Spirit and Heart in the Method (Japanese version) (Meiji-Tosho: Tokyo, 1980), 122. In Swans’ Song (1826), which he wrote just before his death, he explained spiritual power, heart power, and technical power, and clarified that love is the force that unites them.

6. F. Froebel, The Education of Man (Clifton: Augustus M. Kelley, Publishers, 1974), 10.

7. John Dewey, Democracy and Education, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education (New York: The Free Press, 1944), 53.

8. Ibid., 9.

9. Ibid., 77.

10. K. Marx, “The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850,” in K. Marx and F. Engels, Selected Works (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969), 1:278.

11. K. Marx, Capital (New York: International Publishers, 1967), 1:477.

12. V. I. Lenin, Collected Works (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1965), 28:86 (hereafter cited as CWL).

13. CWL, 28:407-408.

14. CWL, 29:132.

15. CWL, 31:368.

16. Yoshimatsu Shibata and Satoru Kawanobe, eds., Material on Soviet Pedagogy (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Shin-dokusho Sha, 1976), 708.

17. CWL, 31:50. See also K. Marx, Capital, 1:454.

18. The instruction was given by the Americans for the reconstruction of Japan after its defeat in World War II. In 1946, an education mission was sent from the United States in order to offer advice on reforming education in Japan. “Report of the United States Education Mission to Japan” was the proposal for democratic education for the re-construction of Japan. That report is quoted here because it contains a good summary of the educational ideals of democracy.

19. Report of the United States Education Mission to Japan -Submitted to the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (Tokyo: March 30, 1946), Introduction, x.

20. Ibid., 3-4.

6. Ethics

1. At this point, I can explain “vertical love and horizontal love.” I can also explain certain other terms that Rev. Sun Myung Moon, in referring to love, has often used, such as the “vertical and horizontal axes of love.”

Since the relationship between God and human beings is like that between heaven and earth, or that between parents and children, it can be described as a relationship between above and below-in other words, it is a vertical relationship. On the other hand, since the rela-tionship between husband and wife is that between man and woman of the same generation, it is a horizontal relationship. Accordingly, God’s love is vertical, and the love between husband and wife is horizontal

God’s love derives from the impulsive, emotional force of His Heart; once it starts, it travels in a straight line-much in the same way as light travels in a straight line. This means that God’s love does not travel in a roundabout or curved manner. This characteristic of love is called “the axis of God’s love.” So, the form of God’s vertical love moving in a straight line is expressed as “the vertical axis of love.” Love between husband and wife also moves in a straight line. So, the form of conjugal, horizontal love moving in a straight line is expressed as “the horizontal axis of love.”

In the same way as the light traveling in a straight line is expressed as a “beam of light,” the love moving in a straight line is expressed as  a “beam of love” or “axis of love.” The vertical beam of love is the “vertical axis of love,” and the horizontal beam of love is the “horizontal axis of love.”

2. The concept of “object” in the term “three object purpose” and the concept of “object” in the relationship of subject and object are slightly different. In a subject-object relationship, “object” refers to a being that stands as an object toward a subject; in the three object purpose, “object” refers to a being that stands in a position correlative to another being.

3. I. Kant, Critique of Practical Reason, trans. and ed. Mary Gregor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 28.

4. Ibid., 73.

5. J. Bentham, The Principles of Morals and Legislation (New York: Prometheus, 1988), 1.

6. Ibid., 24.

7. G. E. Moore, Principia Ethica (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959), 7.

8. Ibid., 6.

9. William James, Pragmatism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975), 97.

10. John Dewey, Theory on the Moral Life (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1960), 141.

7. Theory of Art

1. The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, Exposition of the Divine Principle (New York: HSA-UWC, 1996), 33.

2. Ibid., 20.

3. It is written in the Divine Principle as follows: “God is the Subject in whom the dual characteristics of original internal nature and original external form are in harmony. At the same time, God is the harmonious union of masculinity and femininity, manifesting the qualities of original internal nature and original external form, respectively. In relation to the universe God is the subject partner having the qualities of internal nature and masculinity.” Exposition of the Divine Principle , 19. And also, “It may be said that the universe is formed by the multiplication of myriad substantial manifestations of God’s original internal nature and original external form through their give and take action in the pursuit of the purpose of creation” (Ibid., 31).

4. H. Read, The Meaning of Art (London: Faber and Faber Ltd., 1972), 18.

5. Complementarity, wherein one feels joy through finding in one’s object partner the aspect one lacks, applies not only to one’s Hyungsang but also to one’s Sungsang. For example, there is a case in which one who has a delicate mind likes someone who has a bold mind, and also there is a case in which one who has a hasty and rough character likes someone who has a quiet and calm character.

6. Plato, Early Socratic Dialogues (New York: Penguin Books, 1987), 256.

7. Immanuel Kant, The Critique of Judgment, trans. J. H. Bernard (New York: Prometheus Books, 2000), 69.

8. Albert Hofstadter and Richard Kuhns, ed., Philosophies of Art and Beauty (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1964), 96.

9. H. Read, The Meaning of Art, 35.

10. Romain Rolland wrote: Beethoven said, “There is nothing finer than to approach the Divine and to shed its rays on the human race.” Beethoven, trans. B. Constance Hull (New York: Books for Libraries Press, 1969), 101. Romain Rolland also said in a lecture commemo-rating Beethoven, “His [Beethoven’s] thought to put his art to the use of others was constantly repeated in his letters…. He determined just two objects in his life. They are his dedication to holy art and a conduct intended to make others happy.” Life of Beethoven (Japanese version) (Tokyo: Iwanami-shoten, 1965), 159.

11. Generally, in aesthetics the process of creation is divided into the following four stages: (1) Creative feeling: the state of the fermentation of vague feelings; (2) Conception: the stage where a plan of a work of art looms; (3) Internal refinement: the stage where a clear plan is developed; (4) External perfection, finishing: the stage where a work of art is concretely produced with specific materials and techniques. The Encyclopedia of Aesthetics (in Japanese), ed. Toshio Takeuchi (Tokyo: Iwanami-shoten, 1965), 159. Looking from the viewpoint of Unification Thought, (1), (2), and (3) correspond to the formation of the inner four position foundation, and (4), to the formation of the outer four position foundation.

12. Romain Rolland said that Millet had in mind the following: “The mission of fine art is one of love, rather than hatred. Also, even when fine art describes the pain of the poor, it should not aim at stimulating jealousy toward the rich class.” Millet (Japanese version) (Tokyo: Iwanami-Bunko, 1959), 9. “It was the ultimate objective of Millet’s creed and art to express the poetry and beauty of human life in the pain of labor as much as possible” (Ibid., 11-12).

13. Theodore Lipps (1851-1914) calls it “empathy” (Einfühling) when the subject projects onto the object the feelings inspired by the object, and experiences those feelings as though belonging to the object itself.

14. Tsutomu Ijima, Aesthetics (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Sobunsha, 1958), 213

15. Clara Zetkin, Reminiscences of Lenin (in German) (Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1957), 17.

16. V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, 10:45.

17. Maxim Gorky, “Marshlands and Highlands” in Mother (Japanese version) (Tokyo: Shin-Nippon Bunko, 1976), 2:335.

18. Maxim Gorky, “On Socialist Realism,” in An Introduction to Literature (Japanese version) (Tokyo: Aoki-Shoten, 1962), 136.

19. Ibid., 148-149.

20. Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1970), 20.

21. Joseph Stalin, “Concerning Marxism in Linguistics” (Pravda, 1950), in Marxism and Problems of Linguistics (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1972), 5.

22. Ibid., 7.

23. R. A. Medvedev, who criticized Stalin, depicts how Soviet writers and artists were oppressed in the late 1930s. Medvedev explains the reality of socialist realism by saying that, as it turned out, social realism did not describe the truth of reality, but on the contrary embellished reality in order to embellish Communism. He said that “[In the forties], the embellishment of reality became the hallmark of many writers; the desirable was often indistinguishable from the real.” Let History Judge: Origins and Consequences of Stalinism (London: Macmillan, 1972), 531. He also said that “Artistic quality was bound to be very low. A vast quantity of gray, uninteresting works appeared in all fields of literature and art” (Ibid. 532).

24. Herbert Read, “Art and Society,” in The Philosophy of Art, by Yohan Choe (in Korean) (Seoul: Kyungmun-sa, 1974), 169.

25. Ilya Ehrenburg, “The Work of a Writer,” in The Philosophy of Art, by Yohan Choe, 169.

26. Yohan Choe, The Philosophy of Art (in Korean) (Seoul: Kyungmun-sa, 1974), 168-69.

27. Andr?Gide, Back from the U.S.S.R. (London: Martin Secker & Warburg, Ltd., 1937), 11.

28. Ibid., 45.

29. Ibid., 62-63.

30. Boris Pasternak, Doctor Zhivago, trans. Max Hayward and Manya Harari (New York: Ballantine Books, 1981), 259.

31. Ibid., 408.

32. Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, 217.

8. Theory of History

1. Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History, abridgement of I-VI by D. C. Somervell (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974), 214.

2. Karl Jaspers wrote: “It would seem that this axis of history is to be found in the period around 500 B.C., in the spiritual process that occurred between 800 and 200 BC. It is there that we meet with the most deepcut dividing line in history. Man, as we know him today, came into being. For short, we may style this the ‘Axial Period.’” The Origin and Goal of History, trans. Michael Bullock (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1976), 1.

3. Jaspers also wrote: “But it is an historical mystery which progressive research into the facts of the situation renders increasingly great. The Axial Period, with its overwhelming plenitude of spiritual creations, which has determined all human history down to the present day, is accompanied by the enigma of the occurrence, in these three mutually independent regions, of an analogous and inseparably connected process” (Ibid., 13).

4. In the fourteenth century, John Wycliffe (ca. 1320-84) of Great Britain translated the Bible into English, and asserted that the standard of faith should be placed, not on the pope or the clergy, but on the Bible itself, and fiercely denounced the corruption of the Church. Jan Huss (ca. 1374-1415) of Bohemia believed in Wycliffe’s teachings and started a reform movement of Christianity, but was declared a heretic and burnt at the stake. In fifteenth century Florence, Girolamo Savonarola (1452-98) conducted a church reform movement, but was likewise suppressed and burnt at the stake. Then, in the sixteenth century, the Reformation sparked by Martin Luther (1483-1546) and John Calvin (1509-64) was carried forth. The Renaissance was a cultural movement that started in Italy and spread to the Western European nations in the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries. Dante (1265-1321), Petrarca (1304-74), and Boccaccio (1313-75) of Florence were the precursors of the Renaissance Movement. The center of the Renaissance in its golden age moved from Florence to Rome, during which time the representa-tive figures were Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519), Raphael (1483-1520), and Michelangelo (1475-1564).

5. DP , 191.

6. DP , 197.

7. DP , 198.

8. Toynbee attributes the 400-year period of turmoil until the rise of the Roman Empire to the following effect: “The historian sees that the Graeco-Roman world achieved a rally in the generation of Augustus after the Battle at Actium. He also sees that the preceding breakdown began with the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, four centuries earlier. For him, the vitally interesting problem is: What was it that went wrong in the fifth century and continued to go wrong until the last century B.C.? Now, the solution of this problem can only be found by studying Greek and Roman history as a continuing story with a plot that is one and indivisible.” Civilization on Trial (New York: Oxford University Press, 1948), 46. He said, however, “if one does succeed in obtaining this light from it, it proves, experto crede, to be most amazingly illuminating” (Ibid., 61)-concluding that, if this question is solved, it would be as if we had obtained a revelation.

9. DP , 255, 271. This is a summary of the content of Exposition of the Divine Principle .

10. Oswald Spengler stated as follows: “The application of the ‘homology’ principle to historical phenomena brings with it an entirely new connotation for the word ‘contemporary.’ I designate as contemporary two historical facts that occur in exactly the same-relative-positions in their respective Cultures, and therefore possess exactly equivalent importance…. I hope to show that without exception all great creations and forms in religion, art, politics, social life, economy and science appear, fulfill themselves and die down contemporaneously in all the Cultures; that the inner structure of one corresponds strictly with that of all the others.” The Decline of the West, trans. Charles Francis Atkinson (London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1961), 112.

   He cites as examples the relationship between ancient Graeco-Roman culture and Western culture, Alexander the Great and Napoleon in the political field, Pythagoras and Descartes in the mathematical field, and so on.

11. Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History, Illustrated (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972), 11.

12. Herodotus was a fatalist who described history in the epic manner as manipulated by the thread of fate. On the other hand, Thucydides described historical facts realistically and scientifically. Yet, Thucydides also considered, according to the ordinary Greek way of thinking, that history repeats itself. He wrote, “The absence of romance in my history will, I fear, detract somewhat from its interest; but if it be judged useful by those inquirers who desire an exact knowledge of the past as an aid to the interpretation of the future, which in the course of human things must resemble if it does not reflect it, I shall be content. In fine, I have written my work, not as an essay which is to win the applause of the moment, but as a possession for all time.” The History of the Peloponnesian War (London: J. M. Dent and Sons, Ltd., 1948), 11.

13. According to the view of history of Enlightenment thought, God’s power was excluded from history because history was thought to be made by man. But Vico thought that even though history was made by man, still it is under God’s providence. This means that history is the product of human power and God’s providence. That view is in accord with the Unification view of history. Also, Vico thought that, although history is mainly in the process of progress or development, there are patterns of development and decline in history, and thus he grasped history as spiral progress. In that respect, he was a forerunner for the appearance of the cultural view of history advocated by Spengler and Toynbee.

14. Simmel stated in the introduction to the third edition of The Problems of History that “the spirit describes its coast and the rhythm of wave, in the stream of becoming, whereby it finds itself, and by doing so, it makes the stream of becoming a history.” Die Probleme der Geschichte (Munchen: Verlag Dunker and Humblot, 1923), VII; my translation.

15. Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History, Illustrated, 488.

16. Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History (London: Oxford University Press, 1954), vol. 10, 1.

17. Karl Löwith, Weltgeschichte und Heilsgeschehen (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer Verlag, 1953), 48; my translation.

9. Epistemology

1. Masaaki Kohsaka, a Japanese scholar, states the following: “As a result of ten years of silence and study beginning in 1770, Kant’s critical philosophy, which synthesized rationalism and empiricism, was established, and in 1781, he published Critique of Pure Reason.” History of Western Philosophy (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Sobunsha, 1971), 322.

2. Locke wrote, “How comes it [the mind] to be furnished? … Whence has it all the materials of Reason and Knowledge? To this I answer, in one word, From Experience: In that, all our Knowledge is founded; and from that, it ultimately derives itself.” An Essay concerning Human Understanding (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), 104.

3. Ibid., 525.

4. Ibid., 578.

5. René Descartes, “Discourse Concerning Method,” in John J. Blom, René Descartes: The Essential Writings (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1977), 134.

6. Ibid., 135.

7. René Descartes, “Principles of Philosophy,” in The Philosophical Works of Descartes, (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1911, reprinted 1977), vol. 1, 237.

8. Kant, who regarded Wolff as the representative philosopher of dogmatism, said in the preface to the second edition of his Critique of Pure Reason: “Dogmatism is thus the dogmatic procedure of pure reason, without previous criticism of its own powers.” Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith (London: The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1933), 32.

9. Ibid., 55.

10. Ibid., 93.

11. Here, the idea refers to the rational concept.

12. Engels said, “But if the further question is raised: what then are thought and consciousness, and whence they come, it becomes apparent that they are products of the human brain and that man himself is a product of Nature, which has developed in and along with its environment.” Anti-Dühring (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969), 49. Lenin also said, “The mind does not exist independently of the body, … mind is secondary, a function of the brain, a reflection of the external world.” Materialism and Empirio-criticism (Peking: Foreign Language Press, 1972), 95.

13. Frederick Engels, “Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy,” in K. Marx and F. Engels, Selected Works (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1970), 3:362 (hereafter MESW).

14. V. I. Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-criticism, 313.

15. V. I. Lenin, “Conspectus of Hegel’s Science of Logic,” in V. I. Lenin, Collected Works (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1976), 38:171.

16. Mao Tse-tung, “On Practice,” in Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1975), 1:298-99 (hereafter SWM).

17. Ibid., 1:302.

18. Ibid., 1:308.

19. Engels, “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific,” in MESW 3:102.

20. Mao Tse-tung, “On Practice,” in SWM 1:297.

21. Ibid., 1:304.

22. F. V. Konstantinov, ed., The Fundamentals of Marxist-Leninist Philosophy (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1982), 123-46.

23. O. W. Kuusinen, et al., Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism (Moscow: Foreign Language Publishing House, 1961), 119.

24. K. Marx, “Thesis on Feuerbach,” in K. Marx and F. Engels, Collected Works (New York: International Publishers, 1976), 5:6.

25. Mao Tse-tung, “On Practice,” SWM 1:296.

26. V. I. Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-criticism, 152.

27. Lenin said, “Human thought then by its nature is capable of giving, and does give, absolute truth, which is compounded of a sum-total of relative truths. Each step in the development of science adds new grains to the sum of absolute truth.” Materialism and Empirio-criticism, 151.

28. Some of the major points of Divine Principle, on which Unification epistemology is based, are the following:

(1) “The process of God’s creation begins when the dual chara-cteristics within God form a common base through the prompting of His universal prime energy. As they engage in give and take action, they generate a force which engenders multiplication. This force projects the dual characteristics into discrete substantial object partners, each relating to God as its center” (DP , 24). “Multiplication takes place through origin-division-union action which is built upon good interactions [give and receive actions]” (DP , 31). The pheno-menon of the increase in new knowledge can be explained through this principle.

(2) “The spirit can grow only while it abides in the flesh” (DP , 48). “All the sensibilities of a spirit are cultivated through the reciprocal relationship with the physical self during earthly life” (DP , 49). “Good or evil in the conduct of the physical self is the main determinant of whether the spirit self becomes good or evil” (DP , 48). Through these points of Divine Principle, we can come to understand that cognition through the five physical senses necessarily corresponds to cognition through the five spiritual senses, and that cognition and action (practice) originally are intended to fulfill the purpose of good.

(3) “The natural world returns beauty as an object partner” (DP , 38). “They [human beings] must earn certain qualifications to gain their God-given mandate to govern” (DP , 78). “The purpose for which the universe was created is to have man feel joy and peace.” Explaining the Principle (in Korean) (Seoul: Sejong Moonhwa-sa, 1957), 50. From these points of the Principle, we can understand that cognition and dominion (practice) are in an inseparable relationship, and that the purpose of cognition and dominion lies in the realization of joy and peace.

(4) “Every human being embodies all the elements in the cosmos” (DP , 30). “In a human cell, there is life and consciousness, and the mystery of the universe is contained there” (a sermon by Rev. Sun Myung Moon). From these points we can derive the concepts of protoconsciousness and protoimage as the criteria through which all things in the external world can be cognized.

(5) “In give and receive action, there are various types, and among them there is also a contrast type” (Rev. Moon’s answer to a question from the author). From this teaching, it was possible to obtain the concept of “collation” in cognition.

(6) “The body resembles the mind and moves according to its commands in such a way as to sustain life and pursue the mind’s purposes” (DP , 17). “Thinking is also a kind of give and receive action”; “There are give and receive actions between mind and body, and give and receive actions within the mind” (Rev. Moon’s response to the author’s questions). Through these points of Divine Principle and Rev. Moon’s teachings, it was possible to come to understand such phenomena as the correspondence between the invisible mind and the visible body, that is, the will and the movement of the body, and the cognition (judgment) of the mind about the information (codes) coming through the body (nerves).

(7) “God created human beings to be the rulers of the universe” (DP , 46). “What will the world be like when the natural world abides under the direct dominion of human beings? When a fully mature person relates with the diverse things in nature as his object partners, they come together to form a four position foundation” (DP , 45). “God created the invisible substantial world and the visible substantial world, and He created man as the ruler over them” (Explaining the Principle, 44). “The universe was created as the substantial object to the subjective Sungsang of man” (Ibid., 50). From these principles, we can realize that human beings are created as the subject of cognition as well as the subject of dominion (practice) over all things, and that all things are created as the object of cognition and the object of dominion by human beings, and that, therefore, the relationship between human beings and all things is a necessary relationship, similar to the relationship between mind and body.

29. The functions of the mind include intuition (sensibility), perception, cognition, thinking, inference, conception, planning, memory, pursuit of purpose, recollection, and aesthetic appreciation. Protoconsciousness possesses only some of these functions, such as the functions of sensibility, perception, and pursuit of purpose (purposiveness). Accordingly, protoconsciousness is the mind on a lower dimension. Cosmic consciousness is the expression of the cosmic mind on a lower dimension, that is, the expression of God’s mind (Sungsang) on a lower dimension.

30. Cosmic consciousness is contained not only in living beings, but also in minerals. However, in minerals it surfaces only as physicochemical functions, because of the structural character of minerals.

31. Numbers and laws are in inseparable relationships, as shown in the following:

One    = absolute                               Six     = number of creation

Two    = relative                                Seven   = perfection, Sabbath

Three  = Origin-Division-Union              Eight   = new start

Four    = Four Position Foundation          Nine   = 3 multiplied by 3

Five     = metal, wood, water, fire, and soil    Ten          = Return

The following examples also show that numbers exist with laws or principles.

the number of human vertebra

the breathing rate

the pulse rate

body temperature

the four seasons of the year

the three months of a season

the thirty (or thirty one) days of a month

the twenty four hours of a day

the sixty minutes in an hour

the sixty seconds in a minute

the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter ( π = 3.14 ).

32. The spirit mind is the mind of the spirit self and contains spiritual elements. Thus, the functional part of the union of the spirit mind and physical mind is called “spiritual apperception” in epistemology.

33. When, in the formation of an inner four position foundation of the understanding stage, cognition does not take place, the sense image becomes an undetermined image. Then, the following options are available: (1) Create a new image (a new prototype) and repeat the process of collation; (2) Ask someone else for a judgment (this is called “judgment by another,” or “educational judgment”); (3) Abort the judgment (in this case, the sense image will be erased); (4) Suspend the judgment (in this case, the sense image will be stored in memory).

34. Wilder Penfield states: “The brain is a kind of computer in which an automatic mechanism acquired anew is at work. Every computer becomes useful only after it is given a program and is operated by someone existing separately from the computer. Let us consider the case where we observe a certain thing. It seems that the decision to do so is the function of the mind, which exists separately from the brain.” The Mystery of the Mind (Japanese version) (Tokyo: Hosei University Press, 1978), 110.

35. Eccles states the following: “These considerations lead me to the alternative hypothesis of dualist-interactionism, which has been expanded at length in The Self and its Brain. It is really the commonsense view, namely, that we are a combination of two things or entities: our brains on the one hand; and our conscious selves on the other. The self is central to the totality of our conscious experiences as persons through our whole waking life. We link it in memory from our earliest conscious experiences. The self has a subconscious existence during sleep, except for dreams, and on waking the conscious self is resumed and linked with the past by the continuity of memory.” J. C. Eccles and D. N. Robinson, The Wonder of Being Human (New York: The Free Press, 1984), 33.

36. Andrée Goudet-Perrot, Cybernétique et Biologie (Japanese version) (Tokyo: Hakusuisha, 1970), 15.

37. Ibid., 105.

38. This does not exclude, however, the possibility that future develop-ment in cerebrophysiology may lead to the appearance of a new physiological theory of epistemology. Here I have only provided evidence for the point that natural science, as it develops more and more, will support the positions of Unification Thought.

39. According to Goudet-Perrot, memory can be divided into two kinds: (1) Hereditary memory, which is received before birth, like the infor-mation contained in genes; (2) Acquired memory, which is acquired after birth and constitutes consciousness. Cybernétique et Biologie, 105.

40. Shigeru Kobayashi, et al., Introduction to Brain Science (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Ohmusha, 1987), 134.

41. Masao Ito, Brain and Behavior (in Japanese) (Tokyo: NHK Press Association, 1990), 125.

42. Goudet-Perrot, Cybernétique et Biologie, 89.

43. Hisashi Oshima’s view supports the concept of prototype and the theory of collation of Unification Epistemology. Oshima states the following: “During our long-time contact and interaction with the environment, we come to form numerous prototypes in our mind. The structure of our knowledge is built centering on those proto-types…. Knowledge has a structure in which, centering on prototypes, things are ordered…. When we try to understand someone’s speech, we compare and collate it with the knowledge that is structured in this way. The portions that accord with it are integrated in the structure of knowledge, but those that do not accord are not understood, and even if they appear somehow to be understood, in reality they will be misunderstood.” The Science of Knowledge (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Shinyosha, 1986), 68-69.

44. M. S. Gazzaniga and J. E. Ledoux, The Integrated Mind (New York: Plenum Press, 1978), 132-135.

10. Logic

1. Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith (London: The Macmillan Press Ltd. 1933), 17.

2. Hegel stated the following in the introduction to The Science of Logic: “One may therefore express it thus: that this content shows forth God as He is in His eternal essence before the creation of nature and of a finite spirit.” “The Science of Logic,” in The Philosophy of Hegel, trans. W. H. Johnson and L. G. Struthers, ed. Carl J. Friedrich (New York: The Modern Library, 1954), 186.

3. In the section dealing with “Quality,” in “The Doctrine of Being,” Hegel stated, “Pure Being makes the beginning: because it is on one hand pure thought, and on the other immediacy itself, simple and indeter-minate; and the first beginning can not be mediated by anything, or be further determined.” Hegel’s Logic, trans. William Wallace (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975), 124.

4. Hegel stated, “But this mere Being, as it is mere abstraction, is therefore the absolutely negative; which, in a similarly immediate aspect, is just Nothing” (Ibid., 127).

5. Hegel stated, “Becoming is the first concrete thought, and therefore the first notion; whereas Being and Nought are empty abstractions…. Becoming is only the explicit statement of what Being is in its truth” (Ibid., 132).

6. The Absolute Idea at the end of the philosophy of Spirit is actual while the Absolute Idea at the end of the Logic is abstract. W. T. Stace writes as follows: “The Idea is thus both subject and object here. The whole development of spirit from its earliest stages has been motivated by this one impulse,-to bridge the gulf between subject and object, and this is now complete, and with this the development of spirit is complete. Subject and object are now identical. Absolute reconciliation is reached. And since the Idea now has itself for object, it is seen as what it is, self-consciousness, the Absolute Idea. This is the same result as we reached at the end of the Logic. But the Absolute Idea as found at the end of the Logic was still abstract to this extent that it was merely a category. Absolute spirit is the same thing which has now given itself actuality, has passed from the sphere of pure thought, of categories, into actual existence.” The Philosophy of Hegel: A Systematic Exposition (New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1955), 516.

7. At the end of The Phenomenology of Mind, Hegel stated, “This trans-forming process is a cycle that returns into itself, a cycle that presup-poses its beginning, and reaches its beginning only at the end.” The Phenomenology of Mind, trans. J. B. Baillie (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1967), 801.

Concerning the circular nature of Hegel’s philosophy, W. T. Stace explains as follows: “The sphere of absolute spirit ends the Hegelian system. It appears as the final result of all development. In accordance, however, with Hegelian principles, it is also the absolute foundation, the beginning. Thus the end of philosophy is also the beginning. This is what Hegel means when he says that philosophy is a circle which returns into itself. Here at the end of the system of philosophy we reach philosophy. If we ask what is this philosophy which we have reached the only answer possible is to begin again at the beginning of the Logic. Thus having reached the end, we must, to explain it, begin again at the beginning. This is the circle of philosophy. The Logic, with which we began, treated of the Idea. Here at the end of the philosophy of spirit we again reach the Idea, the Idea now as actual, existent in the philosophic mind. It is here that the world-process is consummated. ‘The eternal Idea, in full fruition of its essence, eternally sets itself to work, engenders and enjoys itself as absolute mind (spirit)’.” The philosophy of Hegel: A systematic Exposition, 517-518.

8. Engels, satirizing the laws of identity and contradiction in formal logic, wrote, “To the metaphysician, things and their mental reflexes, ideas, are isolated, are to be considered one after the other and apart from each other, are objects of investigation fixed, rigid, given once and for all. He thinks in absolutely irreconcilable antitheses. ‘His communication is yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.’ For him a thing either exists or does not exist; a thing can not at the same time be itself and something else. Positive and negative absolutely exclude one another; cause and effect stand in a rigid antithesis one to the other.” Anti-Dühring (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969), 31.

9. Masatane Iwasaki, Contemporary Logic (in Japanese) (Chiba: Azusa Shuppansha, 1979), 31.

10. In response to the question “Is it true that language is a superstructure on the base?”, Stalin clearly denied the view that a new language will be established in place of the Russian language as follows: “In this respect language radically differs from the superstructure. Take, for example, Russian society and the Russian language. In the course of the past thirty years the old, capitalist base has been eliminated in Russia and a new, socialist base has been built…. But in spite of this the Russian language has remained basically what it was before the October Revolution…. As to the basic stock of words and the grammatical system of the Russian language, which constitute the foundation of a language, they, after the elimination of the capitalist base, far from having been eliminated and supplanted by a new basic word stock and a new grammatical system of the language, have been preserved in their entirety and have not undergone any serious changes-they have been preserved precisely as the foun-dation of the modern Russian language.” Marxism and Problems of Linguistics (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1972), 3-5.

11. Masatane Iwasaki, Contemporary Logic, 37.

12. Concerning dialectical logic, the Japanese author Tsunenobu Terasawa wrote in the preface of his An Essay on Dialectical Logic, “About 150 years have passed since Hegel wrote Science of Logic (1812-1816), and in the meantime, no system of dialectical logic to replace it has been written by anyone. Even though the need for dialectical logic from a materialist position has often been emphasized, it has not as yet been written systematically by anyone.” Science of Logic (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Otsuki Shoten, 1957), p. i. And even after Terasawa wrote that, no systematized dialectical logic seems to have appeared.

13. Kant wrote, “All our knowledge starts with the senses, proceeds from thence to understanding, and ends with reason, beyond which there is no higher faculty to be found in us…. Reason, like understanding, can be employed in a merely formal, that is, logical manner, wherein it abstracts from all content of knowledge.” Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Kemp Smith (London: The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1950), 300.

14. Hegel stated the following: “But every additional and more concrete characterization causes Being to lose that integrity and simplicity it has in the beginning. Only in, and by virtue of, this mere generality is it Nothing, something inexpressible, whereof the distinction from Nothing is a mere intention or meaning. All that is wanted is to realize that these beginnings are nothing but these empty abstractions, one as empty as the other.” Hegel’s Logic, 127.

15. Kazuto Matsumura, Hegel’s Logic (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Keiso Shobo, 1959), 40.

16. Johannes Hirschberger, History of Philosophy III: The Modern Period (Japanese edition) (Tokyo: Risosha, 1976), 509-10.

17. According to Akira Seto, the following difficulties arose as a result of the debate on Logic in the fifties:

(i) Difficulty in the Reflection Theory of Logic: It was asserted that the law of identity and the law of contradiction are on the one hand relative, as they are reflections of the relative unchangeability of objective reality, while on the other hand they are absolute as the rules of operation of thought, or the forms of thought. However, the refutation was made that if the law of identity and the law of contradiction are merely relative reflections of reality, then they can naturally have only relative validity.

(ii) Difficulty in the Operation Theory of Logic: Formal logic is the logic of operation in the sense that it is not concerned with the truthfulness of thinking, but with the validity of thinking. Therefore, it was asserted that the law of identity and the law of contradiction are not reflections of reality but they are purely the laws and norms of thinking. However, to recognize independent laws of thinking without any relationship to existence would imply losing the materialistic foundation, falling into Kantian a priorism. Contemporary Epistemology and Dialectic (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Sekibunsha, 1976), 234-237.

The difficulty pointed out in my book refers to part (ii) above. As a method of solving the two difficulties above, Seto suggests that we should recognize that the two contradictions in the law of contradiction, namely, the dialectical contradiction and the contradiction in the formal logic are originally different in nature. However, to regard the two contradictions as essentially different would be to lose the materi-alistic foundation. After all, the problems are not solved at all, as Seto himself points out: “This does not solve all problems…. A question is raised as to the reason why the situation has arisen that the two essentially different contradictions are expressed in the law of contradiction at the same time” (Ibid., 250).

11. Methodology

1. Immanuel Kant, “Prolegomena,” in The Philosophy of Kant -Immanuel Kant’s Moral and Political Writings, ed. and trans. Carl J. Friedrich (New York: The Modern Library, 1977), 45.

2. Kant stated: “That had not even occurred to anyone except him [Hume], although everyone unconcernedly used these concepts (without asking on what their objective validity rested)” (Ibid., 46).

3. Hegel’s Science of Logic, trans. A.V. Miller (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1969), 439.

4. Frederick Engels, Anti-Dühring (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969), 168-9.

5. V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, vol. 38 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1976), 358.

6. Ibid.

7. F. Engels, Anti-Dühring, 33.

>> Go to top

© 2006 The Research Institute for the Integration of World Thought. All rights reserved.