RELIGIOUS PLURALISM 75that X has N entails X is not the sort of thing to have Q
or not to have Q.Property universalism is a nice simple doctrine. It entails that, for any
property Q, the Real – if there is any such thing – either has Q or lacks Q.
Restricted property universalism entails the same claim minus those
properties the Real cannot by its nature have. But according to RP one
cannot ascribe having a nature to the Real.^27 So RP cannot appeal to
restricted property universalism. If RP accepts unrestricted property
realism, then for almost every property one can think of, it is false that the
Real has that property. The importance of this entailment will become
evident shortly.
In each of these ways – rejection of “human concepts” as applying to the
Real, the denial that simple mathematics applies to the Real, the claim that
only properties generable from logic apply to the Real, the denial of any
nature ascribable to the Real – RP emphasizes its doctrine of the alleged
inaccessibility of the Real to concepts. This simply underlines its own
inconsistency in ascribing transcendence, necessity to existence and
wellbeing, and contributing to religious experience^28 to the Real.
Maximally indeterminate beings
I suspect that talk of “the Real” gives RP the appearance of having more
substance that it can possess on its own terms. Consider such properties as
having a property and having only consistent properties. They are
maximally indeterminate. Consider such properties as being exactly an
inch long and weighing one gram. These are maximally determinate. In
between are such properties as being in space, being material, having
length, having weight. These are neither maximally determinate nor
maximally indeterminate. Consider what we might call Maximally
Indeterminate RP according to which the Real is maximally indeterminate
in the sense that only maximally indeterminate properties can properly be
ascribed to it. Given the history of philosophy, the term “the Real” has
certain connotations. RP takes full advantage of these connotations in
offering its theory. The Real, for example, is itself uncaused. The Real can
cause other things. The Real has ultimate value. Highly positive itself, it
has highly positive effects. There is a problem here. The problem is due to
two facts:
1 According to Maximally Indeterminate RP, we can ascribe to the Real
only maximally indeterminate properties.