Phil • Cr. Think • Science • Hist • …
TST PRACTICE

The Philosophy Website

FAQ

Is TST Philosophy monistic?

☐ Read
☑ Read
You’ve read this 0 times.
You’ve listened to this 0 times.
Sun 27 Sep 2026
Published 3 hours ago.
Updated 2 hours ago.
Related FAQs
Is agnosticism a ludicrous position to occupy?
Did Berger and Luckmann really say reality is just made up?
What is fear-based ethics?
What is Eastern “chee,” or qi?
Is cause and effect certain?
Why do complex systems fail when proportionality is removed?
Share :
Email
Print

Is TST Philosophy monistic?

Yes, but only about our shared reality. Our Material World is one substance — the stuff science investigates. However, TST Philosophy itself makes no claim about other substances. It just categorizes the various ideas.

When philosophers talk about substance, they are talking about ultimate reality. This old and unsettled debate is about what’s out there and not merely a property. Descartes dualism focuses on mind or soul and body. Spinoza imagined a single substance: something akin to nature is God. For others, they think of two substances, this reality and the realm that God or the gods occupy. And it’s not about access. That means ideas like the Many Worlds interpretation can be viewed as one substance. The deeper question is whether reality ultimately consists of one kind of substance, two, or many.

This gives us the traditional divide between monism and dualism, but the possibilities are richer than the two labels. Monists propose some form of underlying unity. Dualists propose two fundamentally different kinds of reality. Pluralism proposes more than two. For example, the Hindu tradition contains an enormous diversity of views, while many Western traditions focus on this life and the afterlife.

The TST Split itself is epistemic, not a declaration that only the Material World can exist. Sure, it’s the only reality available for empirical investigation, and its consistency is why science works. But you are free to believe in additional realms such as Heaven, Hell, and Valhalla, and you are free to explore the number of substances. TST simply recognizes that such ideas are not established in the same way as the Material World. They fall under the speculation subtype of TST’s irrational category. TST is monistic about our shared reality, but makes no metaphysical claim beyond that.

— map / TST —

TST Tracker
✓ Reading recorded.
To walk your path with acceptance, embrace that no one knows for sure what ultimate reality actually is. We share the Material World, but ideas about what might exist beyond it remain speculation. Explore those possibilities, believe what makes sense to you, and give others room to do the same.
Michael Alan Prestwood
Author & Natural Philosopher
Prestwood writes on science-first philosophy, with particular attention to the convergence of disciplines. Drawing on his TST Framework, his work emphasizes rational inquiry grounded in empirical observation while engaging questions at the edges of established knowledge. With TouchstoneTruth positioned as a living touchstone, this work aims to contribute reliable, evolving analysis in an emerging AI era where the credibility of information is increasingly contested.
The Prestwood Column
Menu
September 2026
Column Research….
1. Timeline Story
Hume’s Is–Ought Problem
2. Linked Quote
“I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not.”
3. Science FAQ »
Can science prove flourishing should be our goal?
4. Philosophy FAQ »
What is the difference between a normative aim and a normative directive?
5. Critical Thinking FAQ »
Is flourishing for all just utilitarianism?
6. History FAQ!
What is the history of the idea of flourishing in philosophy?
Bonus Deep-Dive Article
TST Normative Ethics: Flourishing as a Philosophical Goal

Comments

Join the Conversation! Currently logged out.
NEW BOOK! NOW AVAILABLE!!

30 Philosophers: A New Look at Timeless Ideas

by Michael Alan Prestwood
The story of the history of our best ideas!
Scroll to Top