Overarching “rightness”-possibility in world, possibility of it all making sense? Way to be, for us to be, that isn’t fucked up like things are? If there’s not then there ought to be. Heck, if there’s not then I ought not to be.
I know of “rightness” beyond what I can put into words, but…a place/way/modality where the kind feelings inside people are safe for them to feel. Where the good feelings towards life and each other aren’t impractical to acknowledge and act on. Rightness in the sense of good. Definitely not in the sense of ‘passing scrutiny’.
Sentient? Uh…maybe the more meaningful question underlying that one is “Can I get in touch with that overarching-rightness thingie, and does it lead to answers that could result in living in that world”? We think ‘sentient’; we think ‘personal’. Maybe that’s an oversimplification, but there’s something meaningful in these criteria even if not only I but my species has trouble putting it in words.
Entity? Uh…I think not. Being an entity myself, I understand the limitations of individuation. We think ‘entity’ because we were already thinking ‘sentient’ and ‘getting in touch with’ and in our experience that with which one can communicate is necessarily an ‘entity’. But it’s actually very limiting, almost like asking if God has feet, or a vagina or a penis, or for that matter an anal sphincter. Yes, there could be ‘entity’ without body, but still…Entities are other, in the same sense that you are other than me; and they are temporal, they experience time, thinking thoughts on Tuesday and reaching conclusions on Wednesday that weren’t in their head on Monday.
Actually, what fits is the more eastern sense that we (all of us, and also the blades of grass, the sparrows, and the stars and the mountains) are included within whatever the divine is. That ties in nicely with the ‘getting in touch with’ factor and helps untie it from the awkwardness of ‘entity’ questions while doing a neat little inversion on the whole question of ‘sentience’. I happen to be sentient (I heard that! I am too!) and if I am something included within that which is divine, sentience is subsumed within that which is divine.
It also suddenly becomes apparent that such a theological world-view is not so incompatible with atheological ones, aside from possible differences on the huge overarching question of whether or not there is a meaning to what we feel. Unless one is going to dismiss every atheist as a nonthinking individual, one has to accept that the atheistic comprehension of the world is sufficiently accurate to be compelling, in other words it needs the same respect as the views of people who identify as having spiritual beliefs.