reduction
Sorry for the trivial question.
- I understand that there is a discussion about reduction in the literal sense or not, but I don’t understand the first question. The wording of the question always starts with how is there a world, since God is everywhere, and then they make excuses for reducing himself. The point is that God is spiritual and the world is material, so what’s the problem with him creating a world without reducing himself? And even spiritual parts of the world are not a contradiction to God, just as angels are not a contradiction to God, because something spiritual does not take up space.
The main problem is not how there is a world because God is everywhere, but how there is something that is not God. Your answer to that is not helpful.
Personally, I agree with you completely. The reduction is simple, of course, and there is no difficulty in it. Rabbi Shem Tov Gefen likened it to a relationship between different dimensions, and so on.
Can those who believe that reductionism is not as simple as it seems claim that our consciousness comes from the principle that materialists claim? Instead of emergent from physical matter - from spiritual ”matter”
Ras”g's response:
[Third method: Creation from the Creator's powers]
And the third method is the method of those who said that the Creator of bodies created them from His power.
I found that these people could not deny the Creator, and yet it was not accepted by their imagination that there was something from nothing. And since there is nothing except the Creator, they assumed in their minds that He created all things from His power.
[Rejection of the third method]
And these, may God have mercy on you, are more foolish than the first. And I saw their foolishness revealed in thirteen ways, etc.
(The Chosen One in Beliefs and Opinions, First Article, Chapter 3)
http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/mahshevt/kapah/1a-2.htm#3
Uri, I didn't understand your suggestion. If it's a product of the whole called God, then it's God. What did you gain? But discussions about a method that is not as simple as reduction should be directed to the owners of this bizarre method. I (as part of the Godhead) don't usually discuss the meaning of nonsense claims.
Only someone who disbelieves in one God can think about reduction in its simplest form and remain coherent.
There is no problem with reduction that is not in its simplest form when one understands what belongs to reality and what belongs to the illusion of the perception of reality.
Uri, regarding consciousness, if it exists, then there is another entity besides God and then God is not one. Therefore, the only option left is that it does not exist.
But it is meaningless to talk about it beyond philosophical theory, since every person knows that he exists. And this knowledge precedes all other knowledge, including knowledge and hypotheses about the existence of God. Therefore, every person is essentially an infidel. And the question is what to do with it.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
