Open the map

Head to head

Bentley Hart’s Monism vs Searle’s Biological Naturalism

Bentley Hart’s Monism: Consciousness, Being, God and Searle’s Biological Naturalism, compared field by field from their entries in the Atlas.

At a glance

Add more theories to this comparisonCompare other theories

The claim

In brief
Bentley Hart’s MonismThis is a metaphysical theory that constructs an ultimate unified monism by asserting the profound inseparability of consciousness (mind) and being (existence) itself. It posits that ultimate reality is God, who is the absolute unity of consciousness and being, fundamentally rejecting reductive physicalist explanations.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismBiological Naturalism posits that consciousness is a real, irreducible, subjective biological feature of the brain, entirely caused by lower-level neurobiological processes and realized as higher-level system features. This approach seeks to solve the mind-body problem by accepting the scientific worldview while acknowledging the first-person ontology of conscious experience.
What consciousness is
Bentley Hart’s MonismConsciousness and being (existence) are two inseparable aspects of a single, ultimate ontological reality.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConscious states are identified as real parts of the real world that are higher-level, system features of the brain, defined as states of awareness, sentience, or feeling that persist during wakefulness.

Big questions

Bentley Hart’s MonismNoConsciousness is a restricted instance of infinite mind (God) and is not reducible to computation or physical processing. Therefore, artificial systems based purely on physical mechanisms cannot instantiate true consciousness.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConditionalSearle rejects consciousness via simulation (Chinese Room Argument) but argues that if the causally sufficient biological mechanism is known, an artificial machine that implements that same mechanism could be conscious, as consciousness does not strictly require biological neurons, only sufficient causal power.
Bentley Hart’s MonismYesConsciousness is identified with ultimate being and God, meaning it is fundamental and cannot be destroyed. Hart’s theology suggests individuals are destined for union with God, becoming 'uncreated'.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismNoConsciousness is entirely physical and solely the product of biological brains; therefore, death of the brain and body means irrevocable, permanent non-existence.
Bentley Hart’s MonismNoConsciousness is metaphysically unified, physically infrangible mental agency , making it impossible to capture, duplicate, or upload via computational means, which would only replicate 'third-person' processes.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismYesIf consciousness is entirely explainable by physical/biological states, then duplicating those states (and their causal relations) in a non-biological medium would, in principle, allow for the uploading and continuation of the first-person mental self.
Bentley Hart’s MonismCosmic/UltimateThe entire reality is rationally coherent and grounded in God, the ultimate reason and consciousness, inherently supplying ultimate meaning, purpose, and value.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismHumanistic onlyAs a materialist theory, Biological Naturalism struggles to rationalize ultimate cosmic meaning or purpose, though humanistic meaning created by ourselves remains possible.

Nature of mind

Ontology
Bentley Hart’s MonismIdealist Monism/Theistic Monism
Searle’s Biological NaturalismPhysicalism (Biological Naturalism). It holds that consciousness is part of nature as a subjective, qualitative biological property, rejecting attempts to 'naturalize' it by denying its subjective ontology.
Mind and body
Bentley Hart’s MonismNon-reductive correlation/Theistic interaction (Justification: Hart argues the causal descriptions of material and mental spheres are radically disparate and incommensurable, making reductionism incoherent. Interaction, while problematic for materialists, is possible, perhaps through the power of God).
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConscious states are causally reduced to lower-level brain processes (causal reducibility), but are ontologically irreducible to these processes because consciousness has a subjective (first-person) ontology while its basis has an objective (third-person) ontology.
Fundamental or emergent
Bentley Hart’s MonismPrimitive
Searle’s Biological NaturalismEmergent
Qualia
Bentley Hart’s MonismQualitative aspects of experience (mental reality) are irreducible. The irreducibility of mind is the same as the irreducibility of being, suggesting qualia are grounded in ultimate intelligibility.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConscious states are inherently qualitative, in the sense that there is a distinct qualitative feel to being in any particular conscious state, and this qualitative feel is a real and irreducible part of the world.

How it works

Mechanism
Bentley Hart’s MonismThe unification of the conditions for knowledge (mind) and the conditions for existence (being) into a single, simple, ultimate act or reality (God).
Searle’s Biological NaturalismThe principle is that all conscious states are reliably and universally caused by lower-level brain processes and realized as system features, functioning as a real biological machine.
Where it is
Bentley Hart’s MonismUbiquitous/Cosmic (Justification: Consciousness, being unified with ultimate Being/God, is the ground of all reality, aligning with Idealist metaphysics).
Searle’s Biological NaturalismLocalized in the biological brain, specifically realized in the brain as higher-level or system features.
What it does
Bentley Hart’s MonismMind holds causal priority over matter. Conscious, unified mental acts depend upon the infinite mind (God). The theory rejects the causal closure of the physical.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConscious states function causally (causal efficacy) as real parts of the real world, providing a basis for intentional action and interaction with the environment.

Evidence and criticism

Testability
Bentley Hart’s MonismSpeculative/Conceptually Testable (Justification: The theory is a high-level metaphysical framework founded on philosophical critiques; Hart questions the possibility of a science of mental reality under physicalist assumptions).
Searle’s Biological NaturalismEmpirically testable in principle, as the theory requires finding the exact causal details of how lower-level brain processes cause consciousness.
Tests so far
Bentley Hart’s MonismNot stated
Searle’s Biological NaturalismThe theory is generally supported by empirical evidence from neuroscience showing the link between consciousness and brain activity (e.g., brain impairment, brain stimulation).
Criticisms
Bentley Hart’s MonismCritics find the conclusion to unify consciousness, being, and God 'strange'. The theory faces the standard challenge of articulating the continuity or interaction between the disparate mental and material spheres without invoking rejected concepts like strong emergence.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismCritics dispute the claim that the causal connection between brain states and consciousness is fully established. Tension exists in maintaining materialism while arguing consciousness is ontologically subjective and irreducible to objective physical processes.

Sources

Key sources
Bentley Hart’s Monism
  • Mind, Being, God - Spiritual Science and the Science of Mind, Part Four (2022)
  • Science, consciousness, information: spiritual science and the science of mind, Part One (2021)
  • Does consciousness defeat materialism (Part 2) (2019)
Searle’s Biological Naturalism
  • The Rediscovery of Mind (1992)
  • Biological naturalism (2007)
  • What things are conscious? (2007)

More comparisons

All head-to-head comparisons →