A prophetic-parable confrontation with postmodern science
Dear Rabbi Shalom, I think you might be interested.
A post I published about the concept of “force” in physics. About its definition. And its connection to the power of God. (And about potential in Aristotle and the problem of induction and Nietzschean science from genealogy)
It seems very close to your areas of interest to me.
I’m really interested in hearing your opinion!!
Thank you very much,
A’
The Language of Prophecy and Anthropomorphic Science
Leave the post for a moment, listen to a story. When I was in high school, I went to a physics major. The teacher who had a PhD in physics explained about “force”. The force of gravity, Newton’s laws, etc. But I didn’t understand what force is? Has anyone ever seen force?? In what space does it exist? Someone hit body A and it moved at speed x until it hit body B? Did he feel a blow? Did it hurt?
Can any of the physicist readers of the post answer this?
Aristotle emphasized the concept of “potential” as expressing that which does not exist but may exist.
In fact, the potential is gone. There is only a present and a future that is in doubt.
The Hebrew language, when it encountered the world of physics, said “power,” which is an anthropomorphic concept. In the Bible, it represents personal heroism and strength. In order to shape metaphysics, the sacred language draws on humanity, in the form of a person to whom the moral attitude is directed and in which God resembles his prophets.
David Hume, who challenges induction, the projection from the present to the future, says that we only infer inductively out of habit. No one has logically proven that the sun will rise tomorrow.
But phenomenologically (experientially) we feel a force on our consciousness that forces us to accept induction as a starting point. Experientially, we experience the divine force that sustains the world striking at our consciousness and forcing us to act within a relationship with this force. We experience the world as logical and not arbitrary. We come into a relationship with God.
The Aphthonian ideas reinforced this perception. They accepted the power of the gods. Indeed, as the problem of euphoron demonstrated, many gods cannot provide confidence in divine speech and a relationship with it. Each god has his own will. Nietzsche’s demand to return to a living science, not one that practices the thinking patterns of geniuses, this demand will be well met by a science that sees “power” – power – as the power of a god, a heroic quality that sets rules for the world of revelation.
(Of course, this is a transcendent God, whose entire knowledge is through the feeling of his presence in prayer that rises from the bottom up. The psalm preceded prophecy and prophecy preceded science. Prayer is the essence of human existence that precedes knowledge, “And I am prayer”)
Hello A.
It’s hard for me to distill a concrete argument from this. There are a few fragments of sentences that I have objections to, but I’m not sure I understood what you wanted to say.
Regarding contradictions (as in Spinoza), I am not in favor of idealizing them. A contradiction may indicate distress, but in itself it means nothing and it is wrong to conclude anything from it.
Now I have published another post that complements and clarifies the issue of prayer in divine attainment. Regarding the Parmenidean contradiction between fleeting experiences and the eternal infinity seemingly understood by reason. I applied the words to Spinoza, who adopted the Parmenidean view in many ways. And I received reinforcement from the words of Professor Menachem Lorberbaum - that the main idea of Maimonides is also through poetry - "We have conquered in its sweetness" (as Lorberbaum's book is called).
When Spinoza prayed to the Blessed One
Spinoza, like a religious man, was ultimately a poet. He sometimes stated that the attributes constitute the substance and sometimes he said that the substance is attained only through itself, and that the attributes are only what the mind attains about it from its own side. So is the substance the world or is it in itself alone? This contradiction is a wonderful oxymoron - like saying “a deafening silence”, just like saying “God (a transcendent concept) exists (an immanent concept)”. Therefore, to be a Spinoza, one must first be educated as a religious boy in the Jewish community. And recite piyyutim and psalms of praise about the transcendent God who works within this world.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
