Interestingly, if you have faith that your current mental state exists and that your perceptions exist (both of which are interdependent), then you can simply define the existence of an Almighty, All-Knowing, Creator of Everything. All other assumptions about the nature of this Force can be extrapolated from its definition. The existence of a Creator does not have to be an article of faith- unless you try to believe that He is a Santa Claus looking guy who sits on a cloud.
Gee, that was easy.... right?
The huge stumbling block to the acceptance of this is preconception; Our false beliefs about the nature of such a force tend to generate a logically impossible image of God. We would like to believe that our Creator is good and fair; that it can even possess such attributes as goodness and fairness. We would like to believe that our creator listens to us and cares; that it can listen and care as we do. Goodness, fairness, hearing, and caring are traits of fallible beings. An omnipotent being hears everything and generates all sound at the same time. An omnipotent being is everything. There can be only one truly omnipotent being; it is the collection of all matter and energy. It is alive and sentient; its thoughts are the collective thoughts of the sentient beings. People can commune with it in infinite ways; including methodological scientific inquiry as well as thoughtful prayer and meditation. However, this communication, like any communication in which one party is not omnipotent, the quality and accuracy of the conveyed information is... variable.
I suppose that is the ultimate logical error. We would like to believe in a less-than-omnipotent friend-like being so that we might not feel so lonely, so responsible, and so fragile in our existence. This being is the one whose existence is in question, I think.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Faith and the World
To make the leap from my own existence to the existence of everything else requires a very short leap from from Descartes.
I perceive. Ergo those things are.
Actually this is such a short leap that Buddhists would argue that you can't really exist without your perceptions.
This statement is the actual statement of faith, but its limitation is the more philosophically interesting concept: "those things" are only proven to exist as mental constructs. An result of this important clarification means the things you dream exist as well and they have the equal "realness" as "real" things- they have equal effect on your ephemeral ego.
People may be tempted to blow this limitation off, but it is important to realize the vital effect that all different kinds of perceptions have on our present ego.
Also it is imperative to recall the limitations of our starting point since this is an extrapolated point. Namely, it is very likely that the perceptions of our ephemeral ego are likely to be contaminated by untruths and misbeliefs.
I perceive. Ergo those things are.
Actually this is such a short leap that Buddhists would argue that you can't really exist without your perceptions.
This statement is the actual statement of faith, but its limitation is the more philosophically interesting concept: "those things" are only proven to exist as mental constructs. An result of this important clarification means the things you dream exist as well and they have the equal "realness" as "real" things- they have equal effect on your ephemeral ego.
People may be tempted to blow this limitation off, but it is important to realize the vital effect that all different kinds of perceptions have on our present ego.
Also it is imperative to recall the limitations of our starting point since this is an extrapolated point. Namely, it is very likely that the perceptions of our ephemeral ego are likely to be contaminated by untruths and misbeliefs.
Faith and Existence- the starting point
I think. Ergo I am.
Existence is assumed by many people and the idea of non-existence is not routinely brought up by the organizers of religion. Anyhow, I think that faith in our own existence in the Cartesian meaning has to be the starting point for any Faith or any belief for that matter.
Furthermore, Descartes' analysis provides somewhat of an empirical flavor that makes faith in this idea enticing to include in the core principles of my religion.
Just because I am, does not mean that I know anything.
To be explicit, this principle only applies to the current mental state, the present ego. Given the Buddhist realization that this state most likely to be grossly contaminated by false beliefs, false conceptions, and other unsavory untruths, this principle can only serve as an explicit philosophical starting point, not a governing principle. Maybe that's why no religions emphasize existence. It kinda doesn't get you very far.
Existence is assumed by many people and the idea of non-existence is not routinely brought up by the organizers of religion. Anyhow, I think that faith in our own existence in the Cartesian meaning has to be the starting point for any Faith or any belief for that matter.
Furthermore, Descartes' analysis provides somewhat of an empirical flavor that makes faith in this idea enticing to include in the core principles of my religion.
Just because I am, does not mean that I know anything.
To be explicit, this principle only applies to the current mental state, the present ego. Given the Buddhist realization that this state most likely to be grossly contaminated by false beliefs, false conceptions, and other unsavory untruths, this principle can only serve as an explicit philosophical starting point, not a governing principle. Maybe that's why no religions emphasize existence. It kinda doesn't get you very far.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
