I understand there can be different versions of antirealism such as epistemic (knowledge) and semantic ("meaning of statements"). I was referring to metaphysical antirealism which is the idea that "nothing exists outside the mind". I was wondering what the scientific implications would be of such a viewpoint.

I think pantheists, deists, agnostics and so on should try more to integrate and find common ground. They could form a stronger middle position that is separate from atheism and theism.

However, I don't think this entity would have any of the other characteristics associated with a personal god.

I don't think pantheism is immutable as everyone dies which is indeed the biggest change of all.

It's not omniscient or omnipotent as it contains many distinct parts. This would also preclude a god that judges people.

Omnibenevolence is missing as some people are kind and some unfortunately are immoral or even evil.

Omnipresence is "the presence of God everywhere at the same time". An impersonal God would have this attribute as everyone and everything (including nature!) would be linked.

Some of these concepts (such as panentheism, collective unconsciousness, etc.) might be interrelated through the idea of an impersonal god. An impersonal god contrasts with a personal one in that it is unemotional and not really able to be prayed to. It seems to be more of an energy that connects us rather than any specific personal god or individual.

Panpsychism is "the doctrine or belief that everything material, however small, has an element of individual consciousness". This might be a relevant definition in terms of nature worship.

I may have been trying to focus on pantheism's effect on our understanding of consciousness in general. I wasn't necessarily trying to exclude nature and the physical world.

I mentioned monopsychism as well but I can't find too much information about it on the web.

When I mentioned about whether god is always good; I mean if we must have the capacity to do evil in order be free entities then why doesn't this apply to an omnipotent god as well. It's the free will defence in theodicy but in reverse.

I found what you said about our connection to the unfolding universe very interesting. There may exist a spectrum of beliefs. This could range from physicalism to pantheism to yet more of a panpsychist outlook that all matter and light possess some degree of consciousness.

Future discoveries on quantum physics and information processing will hopefully shed light on the relationship of the mind and the physical world. When you look up at the night sky the physical world can be awesome. Indeed there's also an active debate on animal consciousness too.

The personification of goodness as God is again thought-provoking. I think it's a nice concept.

I agree that the problem of evil can be puzzling. Thankfully I've never been the victim of a crime but I still might attempt to understand it. Some would say that in order to have free will people must be allowed to do evil. Sometimes criminals can be brought to justice. If you look at history empires rise and they eventually fall. Also, there is no honour among thieves. So sometimes an avowedly evil individual may become the victim of another evil person.

Collective unconscious: "the part of the unconscious mind which is derived from ancestral memory and experience and is common to all humankind, as distinct from the individual's unconscious".

Yes, that is certainly a very relevant idea. I might be trying to mix it with pantheism. I don't think they're mutually exclusive ideas.

I suppose there's a lot of mystery in the world. So I try to be open-minded to different beliefs and receptive to criticism. I just find my interpretation of pantheism appealing for the reasons I've mentioned above.

(sorry neutral not neutal)

I agree that reincarnation is neutal and isn't necessarily theistic. But under pantheism what happens after one stream of consciousness is reincarnated an infinite number of times? Then we'd all be seperated by not only the completeness and absoluteness of death but a boundless never-ending infinite process.

Indeed.

IIt might be a good thing if pantheistic solipsism can inspire a person to be kind and ethical to others.

Just to clarify; I'm commenting only on the consciousness side of the world. I'm making no claims on the physical side of things. I don't know how the physical world came into being or what was before the Big Bang!

In terms of sentience and pantheism, I get the impression there's a subdued connection between everyone. Maybe there's an unconscious dreamlike spirit that links us; the whole surreality of dreams. I don't know for sure.

Panentheism is "the belief or doctrine that God is greater than the universe and includes and interpenetrates it". This may be closer to what you have in mind.

I'm perhaps interpreting pantheism a bit differently. I suppose it depends on how you define God. This is possibly made more difficult by our lack of scientific understanding of what precisely consciousness is.

Under pantheism I tend to view God as the collective sum total of individuals rather than one omniscient all conscious entity.

I was referring to the idea of reincarnation. Even if you are reincarnated, your next life is fundamentally separate to this life by the total erasure of your memories.

Thank you for the reply. I would say we have truly nothing to lose by believing in pantheism if the alternative is meaningless existence and despair.