[udkl]

If by "higher power" you mean things that humans can never comprehend, then yes.

But us not ever being able to understand it does not mean there is no reasoning behind it.

In the end it depends on perspectives & dictionary. You might call it a "higher power" .... I'm contended to end your sentence at 'phenomena'.

[fluxquanta]

>But us not ever being able to understand it does not mean there is no reasoning behind it.

I didn't mean to imply that. But honestly, the idea that there exist physical systems in the universe that are too complex for the human brain to ever fully comprehend or model (dashing physicists hopes of a "theory of everything") sounds a lot like a higher power in the more traditional sense. I'm pretty sure that's close to the definition of the Tao, actually.

[kbenson]

> sounds a lot like a higher power in the more traditional sense.

I would say it sounds like a higher power in the more technical sense. From my experience, at least in western philosophy and religion "higher power" traditionally implies intelligence or direction, which is a leap that I don't think is required to believe there are things we just won't be able to figure out.

[omarchowdhury]

The Tao is not a physical system. Totality is a better definition for Tao, and the wonder of the situation is that it is implied in spirituality that the contingent and changing and partial (that is, us) can know the absolute, unchanging, totality.

[fluxquanta]

>The Tao is not a physical system.

If these are unmeasurable, non-modelable systems that we can never comprehend, then how can we say that they are "physical systems" that differ from the Tao?

[omarchowdhury]

The Tao that can be named is the not eternal Tao.