Findlay’s preferred model bases itself on an analogy with earthly geography, with our “world” occupying a region of maximum differentiation close to the “equator” and God or the "Absolute" occupying a region of maximal convergence at the poles. As we pass our equatorial zone and advance toward the “higher latitudes” there is a
steady vanishing of the harsh definiteness and distinctness of individuals, and a steady blurring or coming into coincidence of the divisions amongst kinds and categories, until in the end one approaches and perhaps at last reaches a paradoxical unitary point of convergence, where the objects of religion may be thought to have their habitat (123-4).
According to Findlay, the progress towards higher worlds or latitudes involves a steady diminution of individuality, corporeality and temporality, and he informs us that the objects in these worlds are governed by associations of meaning as opposed to causality (127). As we continue our ascent, individuality will begin to vanish, as things become more and more indistinguishable from their species and genera, resulting in a realm of values that exist generically apart from any instantiation (137). As individuality diminishes, the obstacles that it and materiality place between communicating minds will vanish as well, as will the communicative gulfs that exist between persons in our own realm (134-5). The attenuated matter of the upper realms, rather than being an obstacle to consciousness and reason, will simply serve as a context for communication and a vehicle for the expression of thought and will (128). Simple location will vanish, and all things will be “predominantly somewhere, but more distantly present everywhere else” (129). Temporality will be altered, and prophecy made possible, as alternative futures are displayed, teaching us what will almost certainly happen or will happen unless we take counter-measures, etc. (131). Finally:
At the mystical pole of our whole geography we may place an object of infinite and no longer puzzling perfection, which we need no longer conceive as a mere supreme instance of incompatible values, but as the living principle of all those values themselves (137).
Thus, at the apex of all the worlds, Findlay places what Plotinus described as “The Good”, what the Indian philosophers referred to as Brahman-Atman, and what the Kabbalists spoke of as the Infinite, Ein-sof.