Question about Descartes’ anthropological claim

שו”ת › Category: faith › Question about Descartes’ anthropological claim

asked 4 years ago

peace,
I read that you do not accept Descartes’ argument as long as he talks about infinity and God because man is able to think about the idea of infinity from observing the idea of finitude that exists in man. On the other hand, I read that you are willing to accept the argument if instead of God it applies to morality and values. I did not understand that well, are you claiming that morality and values are things that man cannot think about without help from God? I would be happy to clarify.
(I would appreciate it if you would try to write as simply as possible, I am not an academic.)
Thank you in advance.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

0 Answers

0 Vote Up Vote Down

מיכי Staff answered 4 years ago

I didn’t say that a person can’t think about values without God making him think about them. What I said was that values have no validity without God enacting them. That’s not the same argument. But to be honest, I will now add that it seems that even thinking about them would not have been possible without God. The concept of value is not an extension of another familiar concept, but something that really has no root in our experience and the reality around us, and is seemingly a complete invention. Therefore, there is no reason for it to occur to us and for us to understand it without God planting it within us. It is not like the concept of God, which is nothing but an extension of finite beings.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

מיכי Staff replied 4 years ago

By the way, anthropological is written as anthropology, like anthropology. Anthropos = human.

דוד replied 4 years ago

Why do you believe that values are “something that really has no root in our experience and the reality around us, and is seemingly a complete invention”. How do you see things like mathematics or philosophy in reality?
2. Let's say this is a complete invention, why does this prove the existence of God?

דוד replied 4 years ago

What I'm actually asking is what are the criteria for something that has roots in our experience and the reality around us? After all, values can also be observed and said to exist. How is this different from mathematics, physics, philosophy, etc.

מיכי Staff replied 4 years ago

There are no criteria. There are things we have experience with similar things and there are things we don't. What needs to be explained here? There is no way to see value in the world around us. That's all.

נתאי replied 4 years ago

Hello Rabbi, another question regarding the anthropological argument.
Given that it is proven that there is no infinite in material reality, then by definition we will not be able to imagine God without external help because a finite material reality like us alone would not be able to think of something infinite. Likewise, the claim that we can learn from the finite in our world is no longer valid, because it simply does not make sense that we would be able to conceive of it.
What do you think Rabbi?
Thanks in advance.

מיכי replied 4 years ago

I totally disagree. There's no problem imagining it. Furthermore, even if it did exist, none of us have seen it, so according to you we still couldn't imagine it.