Q&A: When Is the Creator Something “From Our Experience,” and When Not?
When Is the Creator Something “From Our Experience,” and When Not?
Question
When you say that something complex needs a composer, you argue that the creator of the laws of nature is not something from our experience, and therefore that assumption does not apply to Him.
After that, you say that someone who puts something together usually wants something from it — that too is only from our experience, but here you think it does apply.
So when is our experience relevant, and when is it not?
And a follow-up question: from my experience, I know that people generally do not like being alone.
By contrast, I do not have much experience with people who want incomprehensible religious tasks to be performed for them.
If someone is alone and creates something complex, I would rationally assume that this complex thing was meant to help him not be alone more than for the sake of incomprehensible religious commandments.
So I can assume that, based on my experience, the Creator created the universe and human beings in order not to be alone.
Answer
I argue that every a priori assumption applies to everything, until proven otherwise. But when it is clear that there must be something that has no cause, it is better to assume that this is something outside our experience. You cannot assume that everything must have a cause, because then you end up with an infinite regress. But there is no problem in saying that anyone who created something wants something from it.
You can raise the possibility that He created human beings so as not to be alone. But that is a strange assumption, because He was alone for a very long time before we were created. Beyond that, He also does not enjoy our company the way people do.
The comparisons you are making here are barren and empty formalism. There is no logic in them, and I see no point in discussing these strange comparisons.
Discussion on Answer
And also regarding, “Beyond that, He also does not enjoy our company the way people do.”
I do not understand that. You assume that He enjoys religious commandments that are incomprehensible to us more than He enjoys not being alone — why is that more logical to you? How do you determine that He does not enjoy our company? Maybe that is preferable to being alone. From a priori experience, the desire not to be alone (even if you are not an active participant in society) is clearer than the desire to have incomprehensible tasks performed for you.
I’ve had enough. Let us conclude with a prayer for relief from the Holy One, blessed be He’s loneliness. 🙂
Summary: the Creator is from our experience when it helps prove His existence, and not from our experience when it prevents disproving Him.
Alternative summary: there is no point discussing things with someone who has not yet passed the basic stage of reading comprehension and logic.
Why is that a stranger assumption than assuming that He wants the observance of religious commandments? I can say that He also existed for a very long time without religious commandments before we were created. (Besides, if He created “time” in the Big Bang, then I do not really understand what it means that there was a long time before there was time.)