The Problems of the One and the Many

As I mentioned in class the other day, there are a bunch of problems that can be categorized as being related to the problem of the one and the many. The basic issue is that when oneness is prioritized, manyness gets cut out and when manyness is prioritized oneness gets cut out. Or put differently, when unity is most fundamental, diversity gets eliminated and when diversity is most fundamental, unity gets eliminated. 

Let’s consider some examples: 

Ethics: Making individuals more fundamental than communities results in communities being sacrificed for the sake of the individual. My interests, desires, hopes, etc take precedence over those of the community. If the individual is most fundamental, then it is permissible for the individual to prioritize her interests over those of the community. Making the community more fundamental than the individual results in individuals being sacrificed for the sake of the community. The community’s interest, desires, hopes, etc take precedence over those of the individual. If the community is most fundamental, then it is permissible for the community to prioritize its interests over those of the individual. 

Concrete Case: our current political situation seems to be a movement towards the prioritization of minority groups over the majorities (white men, Christians, white persons in general, persons of European decent, etc), while some members of the majorities are resisting. But notice that prioritization of the majority groups over the minorities is really the same damn thing. Think of each ethnic group (include in ethnic group for our purposes here: race, class, gender, sexual identity, etc etc) as a kind of individual and you get the first way of prioritization mentioned above (individual over community). Think of each ethnic group as a community and you get the second way of prioritization mentioned above. Either way, various individuals or groups are going to get sacrificed for the sake of a different individual or group. 

Metaphysics: Is the most fundamental reality one or many, united or diverse? Suppose it is one. For ease of thinking, let’s assume that there are only two types of being possible: material being and spiritual being. If everything is material, it is very hard to see how thinking, reason, intentionality (the fact that our thoughts are aboutother things), logical relations, math relations, etc could possibly exist. But exist they do! So, global or cosmic materialism (the view that everything is made of matter) seems to sacrifice mentality (at the very least). If everything is spiritual (made of immaterial stuff), then it is very hard to see how our senses are not systematically deceived. My body does not appear to be non-physical. The computer I am working on does not seem to be purely immaterial. 

These views have a bunch of different names. The view that everything is matter is sometimes called materialism, physicalism, material monism, naturalism, or scientism (these terms unfortunately sometimes refer to related but different positions as well). The view that everything is immaterial or spirit is something called spiritual monism (eastern religions sometimes refer to it this way) or idealism. Interestingly, the pantheism—the view that all is god—can take either a materialist form or a spiritualist form. 

Another waythat the problem of the one and the many can show up in metaphysics is in terms of the unity of the world or the connectedness of all things. Our universe seems to have a bunch of different kinds of stuff. But all of this diversity seems to be related in all sorts of interesting ways. The various sciences seem to be getting at the most fundamental rules that govern or describe the most basic stuff. So, psychology is attempting to discover the most bais principles that govern or describe human’s mental life, sociology is attempting to discover the most basic principles that govern or describe societies organizational life, biology, the most basic principles that govern or describe life, chemistry, the most basic principles that govern or describe interactions between elements, physics, the most basic principles that govern or describe the most basic physical constituents of reality. But, a problem emerges. Is sociology reducible to psychology, which is reducible to biology, which is reducible to chemistry, which is reducible to physics? If so, then all of the diversity we seem to see is really reducible to subatomic particles and the laws that either govern or describe their behavior. So, we started with lots of diversity and wound up getting rid of it all. Or, we have a bunch of totally separate areas that cannot really be unified in any coherent way. So, we seem to have unity (one coherent and united universe) that winds up being a bunch of distinct and non-overlapping areas of existence. 

There are a ton of other areas that the problem of the one and the many or the problem of unity and diversity shows up in. What the doctrine of the trinityseems to add to this discussion is that if it is true, then the most fundamental reality, what is the most real, the most basic, the ground of everything else, is BOTH one and many, BOTH unity and diversity. Both oneness and manyness, unity and diversity are equally ultimate, equally fundamental, equally most basic, most real. It is completely unsurprising that the trinity is incredibly difficult to fathom and potentially the most beautiful truth to contemplate.