Q&A: A. The Validity of Human Reason. B. The Argument from Order
A. The Validity of Human Reason. B. The Argument from Order
Question
Hello,
I would like to receive a brief answer as to why we should follow our reason even though there is no conclusive basis for its validity. (Or perhaps there is such a basis…)
Also, I would like to know the Rabbi’s view on the way our early sages saw things (already mentioned in the Talmud) regarding the existence of God from the order in the world. For assuming God does not exist, then space and time are infinite, and if so, since order is also one possible outcome of randomness, then necessarily (or at least possibly) infinitely many universes would come into being, and among them infinitely many ordered universes—like our own. Unless we say that space and time are not infinite.
Thank you in advance,
A Young Man
Answer
How would you like to receive that answer? In terms of rational consideration? Every discussion presupposes reason and is therefore committed to it. We have no other tool. Therefore there is no need at all to justify our commitment to reason. As Rabbi Shimon Shkop wrote: even following the Torah and the Holy One, blessed be He, is the result of rational consideration, and that is how one should relate to any rational consideration.
As for the proof, I did not understand your questions. But I discussed this at length in my book The First Existent. See there in the third conversation (and in an earlier version, in the third booklet here on the site).
Discussion on Answer
Regarding question B: my intention is based on several assumptions. A. Every possibility that has some probability—even if it is a probability approaching zero—still, if it is given the capacity to occur (-matter, space, and time) in proportion to the size of that probability, then it must occur. (For example: assuming that the chance that a glass cup will shatter and its fragments scatter in the shape of a symmetrical triangle is one in a million, then if I smash a million glass cups, necessarily—or at least presumably—one cup will shatter into a triangle shape.) B. Order is also included among the possibilities of randomness. (In the example above: a symmetrical triangle is also one possible outcome of random shattering.)
If so, assuming that if there is no creator of the world then the world is infinite (in time and space), and if there is enough matter, then necessarily infinitely many random, disordered universes will come into being, and among them a number of ordered universes (like ours).
Moreover, if so, then infinitely many ordered universes will come into being, since we are dealing with infinity.
Unless we say that the world is not infinite, or we reject one of the aforementioned assumptions.
Thank you in advance,
A Young Man
It seems to me that this is where we part as friends. If you do not accept reason, I do not see how we can discuss anything. Do you want me to hypnotize you?
The fact that every discussion presupposes reason does not mean that I am bound by it, and from the fact that no answer can be received except in the terms of reason, that itself is the reason there is no necessity for its validity. Moreover, even this conclusion—that reason is the one asking, and therefore cannot negate its own validity—is also itself a rational conclusion, and so there is no necessity at all for the validity of reason (just as there is no necessity for denying it either…).
Besides that, I did not understand the comparison to the words of Rabbi Shimon Shkop.
Thank you in advance,
A Young Man