The Principle of Causality – A Personal View
Hello Rabbi,
In my opinion, I tend to accept the understanding in the category of causality – cause and effect relationships:
Their origin comes from the experience that our senses convey to us and we were not born with them/ they come from logic.
And therefore,
I see no problem in principle in accepting the answer to the question of knowledge and choice (as long as it remains “above” and does not descend to this world – the world-principle-of-causality).
Does this view of mine create a contradiction in my agreement with the correctness of the cosmological view (and other proofs) regarding the “necessity” of the Creator?
On the one hand, I oppose the principle of causality, and on the other hand, I want to project it onto the existence of the Creator.
Isn’t this a contradiction?
—
PS
I thought about dividing the process of thinking up to the Creator into the process of thinking in the shadow of the Creator.
But I would still like to hear the Rabbi’s opinion on the matter 🙂
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.
My understanding is that the principle of causality is a product acquired from our experience in this world,
and not a product of pure understanding and common sense.
(This is because the mind is subjective and not objective towards reality)
Therefore, I also see no problem in accepting that the knowledge of God does not affect our actions in the world.
We ask: How is it possible that the two principles of the Jewish faith, “knowledge” and “freedom of choice”, can exist?
Doesn't one principle reject and overthrow its companion?
Rather, I think that because the entire origin of the principle of causality is only a drawing of our own thoughts following experience
and this concept has no basis other than our acquaintance with other worlds, then the question is self-evident.
And hence I ask,
Does this understanding create a contradiction in my agreement with the correctness of the cosmological view (and other proofs) regarding the “necessity” of the Creator?
After all, they too depend on the principle of causality.
A strange and unclear question. First, you are of course wrong in understanding the principle of causality. But now you are asking, if indeed the principle of causality does not exist (as you misunderstand) but is just an obscene habit of ours, can I draw conclusions from it? Do you mean conclusions with objective validity? No. Subjective validity? There is no such thing. By the way, I do not really exist either, and according to you, so do you with regard to me (who am I?).
I wrote all this for nothing, since I do not usually provide a service to mistaken people and help them correctly draw incorrect conclusions from their incorrect assumptions. In short, all this is nonsense.
Thanks for the quick response!
First,
I don't think that the principle of causality that we have adopted is an obscene habit or anything. It truly describes what is happening in our world. And I am not skeptical about its existence.
But you cannot extrapolate the law of causality from our universe to other universes and assume that the same laws prevail there.
Just as no one would think that another universe must have the same laws of nature.
Why is this not true?
As David Hume showed, the principle of causality is an assumption of reason and is not learned from experience. I have elaborated on this in several of my books (Two Carts, Truth and the Unstable, The Logic of Time in the Talmud, and more).
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
