A creator is made up of his product?
Peace be upon you, Your Honor.
1) When I read the book on evolution, I saw that you reject the “Dawkins counterargument” by claiming that it is not true that the creator of a complex thing must be more complex than its creation. This is true only for random and blind creation, but if there is an intelligent creator, then it is not necessarily more complex than its creation.
I wanted to ask if there is no logical/mathematical/intuitive law, so to speak. That is: Can any entity create something more complex than itself? Or can a person, in principle, create something more complex than themselves?
It actually sounds logical to me that in order to create something complex, you need to have at least the same level of complexity as the product (a nail does not make a carpenter, etc.), but for some reason the Rabbi does not think so.
2) When atheists claim that adding God is adding something more complex than the universe and that it just complicates the story, how can it be said that God is complex? What exactly is he composed of?
PS: I think the rabbi should add tags to the site that will group together all the responsa that deal with the same topic, making it easier for readers to find their questions if they have already asked them.
Best regards, Joseph.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thanks.
1) So I understand that in principle there is no obstacle for a person to create something complex from himself, right?
2) But then atheists always claim that, as I say, God is taste itself, so they say this about the universe and its laws that have always existed and it is better not to add a link for no reason. What should I answer them?
3) Is a person smarter (not in terms of knowledge but ability) because his brain is more complex? Because if not, then wisdom can be seen as a universal attribute of the soul, and then God does not have to be complex.
1) Do you mean more complex than himself? I already wrote to you that I do not know what the complexity of man is. Talk about his ability. Of course, a man can only create what he is capable of creating (tautology).
2) Because the universe and its laws are not their own cause, just as the cat next to me is not its own cause.
3) As mentioned, I do not know what complexity is in this regard.
1) Indeed, that is my intention. I argue that if we succeed in quantifying the complexity of the human body, including its brain, and find that it is a, there is no reason why it should be able to produce another biological body whose complexity is greater than a, since intelligence is not a function of complexity but rather a kind of “infinity”.
2) I understand. In fact, we look at the objects around us and see that they are not the necessity of reality, and therefore we conclude that there is an entity x that is the necessity of reality and that is God. This can be seen as an indirect ontological view, although we have not proven by definition that there is such a thing as the necessity of reality, but we have reached such a conclusion in order to stop the infinite regression. Right?
1) If you can quantify it, we'll talk.
2) Indeed.
But this is the very argument you wrote in the book against Dawkins, that he came to the conclusion that God is more complex than the universe because of a mistake, because when creation is not random (intelligence is at work here) the component does not have to be more complex than the creation. Now you've changed your mind?
This requires clearer definitions of complexity (entropy).
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
