Terry Sampson
Well-Known Member
And there's where I'm stumped the most, (and get the most flack from others).Monism holds that there is an energy flowing through all form, (and simultaneously exists as formless), and at its essence, that energy is of one substance, one variation, it's the same essential energy everywhere.
I can describe "nothingness", i.e. what Newton had in mind when he spoke of "Absolute Space".
- "Absolute Space" is a set (i.e. collection of things).
- The things are elements of the set: dimension-less points, each of which does not have length, width, or depth. Each is nothing more than a "location", most simply and sufficiently identified using a three-dimensional Euclidean Space, each dimension of which is bidirectional.
- The points do not move relative to each other.
- There are an infinite number of them.
- And Absolute Space is, as a whole, boundless.
- I'm told that a "line" is a one-dimensional, geometric concept; a "plane" is a two-dimensional, geometric concept; and a "cube" is three-dimensional, geometric concept.
- Some one-dimensional thing can be located in a geometric line in Absolute Space and disappear from the line it was in, but it would still be somewhere in Absolute Space.
- Some two-dimensional thing can be located in a geometric plane in Absolute Space and disappear from the plane it was in, but it would still be somewhere in Absolute Space.
- Because I cannot visualize or imagine a four-dimensional, geometrical concept, I cannot imagine or visualize where a point-mass, or anything larger, might go to if someone tried to tell me that "it's outside of Absolute Space". The notion that anything, including Brahman or any subset of Brahman, or Ein Sof or any subset of Ein Sof, exists outside of Absolute Space eludes me completely.
- "Absolute Time" is a set. The elements of this set are dimensionless instants, each of which does not have duration. Each is nothing more than a "location", most simply and sufficiently identified using a one-dimensional, one-directional Time-line that has no beginning or end. Absolute Time is, as whole, infinite and eternal. The notion that anything, including Brahman or any subset of Brahman, or Ein Sof or any subset of Ein Sof, exists outside of Absolute Time eludes me completely.
I agree wholeheartedly. But ... I once was acquainted with an agnostic atheist (now dead) who described the smallest particle to me as a point of mass, i.e. a concrete thing that has no length, width, or thickness, and yet is something and is not nothing. He called it an "atom", using the Greek word that the ancients called it. [The Greek word "atom" means "indivisible] The same man told me that he believed that there are an infinite number of these atoms moving in and through boundless Space. He said more, much of which I could not comprehend. According to the man, atoms move at the same, constant speed through space, but in curved paths, because--since they have mass--the forces associated with each atom prevent it from moving in a perfectly straight line through Space.
Now, imagine a boundless (infinite) and eternal cosmos filled with an infinite number of point-masses in motion, if you can.
And tell me, if you can, what is "a spirit"? Some Christians believe God is a spirit who can exist outside of Space and Time. I say that's nonsense. Space--by my definition--is boundless/infinite and Time--by my definition--has no beginning or end. But when I try to tell them that, they cannot give me a definition of Space and Time that makes sense, and then insist that God can be inside of Space and Time and outside of Space and Time. And it's clear to me that the space and time that they have in mind are subsets, i.e. portions, of the Space and Time that I say exist. Muslims and Baha'i, are ready and willing to say: "Nobody knows what God is" or "God is what His attributes say He is". But it's as useless, if not more so, to discuss the matter with them as it is to discuss the matter with Christians. Only some of the Jews and some of the Hindu have given the matter any thought, but I haven't discussed the matter with either of them.
I say, God is Spirit, infinite/boundless, eternal, and substantial: i.e. something, not nothing like Space. And the only something that I can think of has mass.
I have since read that mass and energy are not the same. But I am still stuck on the following subject-matter. I think of it as "The Spirit-Body Problem" [my twist on "The Mind-Body Problem].
- Essentially, The Mind-Body Problem goes something like this:
- Proposition 1. The mind is a nonphysical thing.
- Proposition 2. The body is a physical thing.
- Proposition 3. The mind and the body interact.
- Proposition 4. Physical and nonphysical things cannot interact.
- Whether or not those four propositions are true, that's the "core" of the Mind-Body Problem as I've received it.
- Now, I turn to my twist on that problem: The Spirit-Body Problem.
- Either the propositions of the Spirit-Body Problem are:
- Proposition 1: The Spirit is a nonphysical thing.
- Proposition 2. The Body is a physical thing.
- Proposition 3. The Spirit and the Body interact.
- Proposition 4. Physical and nonphysical things cannot interact.
- Or the propositions of the Spirit-Body Problem are:
- Proposition 1. The Spirit is a physical thing.
- Proposition 2. The Body is a physical thing.
- Proposition 3. The Spirit and the Body interact.
- Proposition 4. Physical things can and do interact.
Last edited: