Soul of the world, no life, no world remain, no beautiful men, women, longing, only this ancient love circling the holy, black stone of nothing, where the lover is the love, the horizon, and everything within it.              --Rumi

Any human growth or development, physical, mental, spiritual, intellectual, psychological, emotional, cognitive--how ever one divides the whole--affects the whole. To develop any particular part is to develop the whole.

Cognitive development results in the comprehension of reality in ever more subtle and complex ways. Biochemical, psychological, and intellectual factors aside, cognitive development has deep implications for spiritual development (and vice versa). They are as interconnected as any other facets of the whole.

There is an unfortunate dearth of research on cognitive development between early and late adulthood, but I believe we have a largely untested capacity to continue developing cognitively (and thus spiritually) throughout the life cycle. I also think paying more attention to adult cognitive development could ameliorate many social and cultural problems.

Ironically, to continue approaching a spiritual concept like e.g. the Unity of All Being, we must first overcome the illusion that reality as commonly perceived is itself unitary. To put it another way, in any discipline we must first learn parts before we can comprehend anything as a whole.

Coming to understand reality as an interconnected set of differing partial functions was a significant step in my own cognitive/spiritual development. There are different kinds of reality that make up the whole. While these interrelate, confusing or conflating them hampers our ability to continue developing, both individually and collectively.

Empirical
Reality as mediated, measured, observed, extended or repeated through our neurosensory structures and functions, without the vastness beyond either our narrow sensory bandwidths and mechanical extensions, or whatever gets in that our brains are not developed to comprehend. Though perceived as external, it is compiled and assembled between our ears along with other facets of reality that may affect its perception. It allows us to survive in the (apparently) physical world long enough to reproduce. Empirical reality is individual-objective in nature, but verified through collective comparison of experience.

Systemic
The network of relationships connecting all entities into wholes, and smaller wholes into larger. Though the relationships themselves are invisible and immeasurable, what can be observed and measured (empirically) are the material objects and influences that travel along them. An empirical angle allows us to examine and comprehend a systemic one. Systemic reality is collective-objective in nature, but verified through individual observation and collective comparison.

Cultural
The sum total of what a given social entity considers important, as realized through many modes of reflection and/or expression. "Values" can be similarly defined as "what is important," but they are abstract and separate from the reflections, expressions, material interactions and social phenomena that realize them. Cultural reality is collective-subjective in nature, but without practical connections to empirical, systemic and intrasubjective reality it becomes dysfunctional or irrelevant.

Intrasubjective
Comprises personal experiences of biochemical processes we call emotion, imagination, memory, and psychological states, including what of these we may share through the process of evolution, and what may be considered "spiritual" in nature. It would also include the type of belief called faith, because faith is not based on objective reality, and though culturally mediated, remains an individual experience. Intrasubjective reality is individual-subjective in nature; however, psychological well-being is often measured by apparent coordination between intrasubjective and other facets of reality.

Implications of multifaceted reality
Oversimplified views of reality are the basis for any number of disputes and problems within societies and cultures around the world. One example is the unfortunately (and amazingly!) continuous dispute in the U.S. over teaching the theory of evolution.

Fundamentalism, contrary to popular belief, is not some kind of Medieval throwback; rather, it is quintessentially Modern. As a reaction to Modernism it shares a symbiotic relationship. Prior to the Enlightenment there was no reaction to it, and thus nothing identifiable as seemingly separate from it.

A great gift of the Enlightenment (it also has its curses) is the notion that we can separate facts from all that is purported, by means of empirical verification. The implications of this have transformed human experience. A great excess of the Enlightenment is the notion that only such facts are real. The implications of that have left many in industrialized societies spiritually impoverished. Ironically, both fundamentalists and hard-core secularists operate according to this same excessive presupposition--that only facts are real.

The secularist says, "Only facts are real; so, as this creation myth cannot be empirically verified as fact, there is nothing real about it." The creationist (perhaps showing more spiritual sensitivity) says, "Only facts are real; so, as I know deep down this story of creation is real, it must be a fact." The creationist selects an extremely limited set of evidences and weaves a convoluted web of junk science to try and empirically verify what he presupposes as fact, while the secularist tries to debunk a powerfully truthful metaphor with mere proof that it is not factual.

Both positions miss the point because they are literalistic and informed by a unidimensional grasp of reality. If both parties come to understand that the scientific theory of evolution describes one kind of reality (empirical), while the biblical story of creation describes another kind of reality (intrasubjective), then both can be honored as valuable truth, albeit of different kinds, and both can be integrated into overall reality. Both sides of the dispute are the result of elevating empirical reality above all other types, and failing to distinguish between metaphor describing intrasubjective reality and material evidence describing empirical reality, abusing both in the process.

Another example: when politico-religious conservatives (fundamentalists) in the US talk about "values," they are talking about something with many examples but no definition--something culturally invested with great worth, even though it cannot be defined. It is also a political hook, the cultural equivalent of a food advertiser's "chewy homemade goodness"--something worthy sounding and vaguely exemplifiable, yet immeasurable and unverifiable (how many grams of "goodness" per serving; can an abstract concept be chewy?).

But what people truly value can be empirically verified (or as Jesus of Nazareth said, "By their fruits ye shall know them"). The results of millions of voters being manipulated through the demagoguery of appeal to "values," irrational fears, and empty promises can also be empirically verified, but as long as people elevate the cultural reality of "values" above the empirical realities of wage stagnation, low-income jobs replacing skilled labor, widening income gap, perpetual fiscal deficit, privatization of public benefits, human rights abuse and curtailment, habitat destruction (ours), international alienation, hatred and mistrust of the U.S. and its inhabitants, militarization, slaughter of thousands and suffering of millions, lack of purported threats--and notably--lack of change on "values" related issues, they will remain blind to or in denial of the magnitude of these critical problems. All that will matter is whether or not a person who apparently shares their "values" is in office. Vote for "values" and get an empirical reality that increasingly favors the super-rich and sucks for more and more ordinary people in the U.S. and around the world.

Both of these examples touch on matters of faith as a critical issue in U.S. culture and society, and both are the result of failure to comprehend reality in a sufficiently developed manner. Conversely, both problems might be solved if people could come to understand the differing components of reality inherent in them.