At the heart of the schism between the empirical and positive method of research on one hand and the existential and phenomenological method of research on the other hand is the exclusion of philosophy and religious sources on the part of the former. This exclusionary practice stands in stark contrast to the permissibility of philosophy and religious sources on the part of the latter method. Thus, what results from the empirical and positive method – which has been the predominant method in the Western sciences over the course of the last 500 years of human history and thus the modern period – is “The Desacralization of Knowledge.”
In the traditional period of human history – which comprises of the entirety of human history before the last 500 years and thus the modern period of human history – knowledge and information had transcendental roots and thus knowledge and information were seen as “unitive,” in the sense that knowledge and information came from one transcendental source. The unitive nature of knowledge and information in the traditional period would in turn lead to the transcendental source of such knowledge and information through either Platonic ecstasy, intuition, and relations between a student and a spiritual guide.
Thus, by excluding the transcendental source of knowledge and information through the exclusion of philosophy and religion, the empirical and positive method of research leads to what René Guénon and others have called “The Desacralization of Knowledge,” which in turn renders the weltanschauung of modernity as hollow and superficial.
In the Western world, the existential and phenomenological method seeks to overcome “The Desacralization of Knowledge” by shedding light on the unitive nature of knowledge and information through the employment of a wide range of data and sources, which in turn leads to the transcendental nature and origin of such knowledge and information.
“Transcendental Theosophy” – a concept that was engineered by the Persian philosopher and scholar Mulla Sadra – amounts to the employment of philosophical and religious sources to shed light on the unitive nature of knowledge and information and thus affirm the transcendental nature and origin of such knowledge and information. In turn, Mulla Sadra became the most important philosopher and scholar of the last 400 years due to his engineering of “Transcendental Theosophy.” Mulla Sadra also facilitated the transition from the “Essentialism” of Avicenna to “Existentialism” in both the philosophical and religious underpinnings of knowledge and information. What Mulla Sadra argued was that the existence of the origin of unitive knowledge – namely, God – preceded the essence of the origin, whereas Avicenna and others argued that the essence of the origin preceded the origin itself.
In sum, knowledge and information are seen in the empirical and positive method as disorganized and fragmented, whereas knowledge and information in the existential and phenomenological method are seen as organized and unitive. Moreover, Mulla Sadra precedes the likes of Kierkegaard, Husserl, Nietzsche, Sartre, and Heidegger. Thus, the East and Mulla Sadra serve as the impetus for the existential and phenomenological method employed by philosophers and scientists in the Western world until now.