Re: Reality can be known?
- From: "Kent Johnson" <kent@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 01:39:17 GMT
Hi Doug, I am not sure I understand the question. So let me restate.
I said we cannot know the essence of a thing, we know things by their
attributes.
You ask how to reconcile my statement with a quote from the Universal House
of Justice that includes this statement: "...human understanding is
limited..."
Although the statement from the House does not specifically state how human
understanding is limited there is agreement with my statement in that, if it
were not limited we could know things by their essences, their entirety,
their reality. As it is, we have a limited understanding.
Does that answer your question?
--Kent
"Douglas McAdam" <douglasmcadam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:X5mdneQ-fspSczzanZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dear Susan and Kent-
Below are two opinions you expressed about reality being known or not
known and also here below is a quote that appears to contradict what
you are saying because it says man can discover the realities of
things.
So how can we reconcile these statements with the quote below?
Susan: "I'm not sure we can ever conceive of something's reality."
Kent: We cannot, and that is the point. We cannot conceive the reality
of a
chair, we cannot conceive of the reality of God. But we can define
them as
either something real or something imaginary. I disagree with defining
God
as something imaginary, and if we define Him as something real, we
refer to
His attributes, those things which we can conceive. If we don't, well,
he
is no god of mine. My God is real.
There is, and can be, no conflict between true
religion and true science: true religion is
revealed by God, while it is through true science
that the mind of man ?discovers the realities of
things and becomes cognizant of their
peculiarities and effects, and of the qualities
and properties of beings? and ?comprehendeth the
abstract by the aid of the concrete?. However,
whenever a statement is made through the lens of
human understanding it is thereby limited, for
human understanding is limited; and where there is
limitation there is the possibility of error; and
where there is error, conflicts can arise. For
example, at the present time many people are
convinced that it is unscientific to believe in
God, but, as
human enlightenment progresses, the scientists
and philosophers of the future will not be, in the
words of ?Abdu?l-Bahá, ?deniers of the Prophets,
ignorant of spiritual susceptibilities, deprived
of the heavenly bounties and without belief in the
supernatural?.
(From a letter written on behalf of the Universal
House of Justice, 26 December 1975 to an
individual believer)
Compiled by the Research Department of the
Universal House of Justice, A Compilation on
Scholarship (Haifa: Bahai World Centre, February
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Reality can be known?
- From: Douglas McAdam
- Re: Reality can be known?
- Prev by Date: Re: Reality can be known?
- Next by Date: Re: Reality can be known?
- Previous by thread: Re: Reality can be known?
- Next by thread: Re: Reality can be known?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading