The Search for God Page 2.1.1.3
Centuries of conflict have arisen over what we know. How can this small article hope to cover this topic? What I hope to accomplish is to review the question:
What can we agree we know with near 100% certainty?
If I look at a leaf and say, “The leaf is green!”, I have just made a declaration to the world about what I believe, what I think, and what I see. Each of the words I just used has a definition, would you agree?
For a meaningful conversation, we must agree on the very words we are speaking. We must agree on a concept of the leaf or an agreed-upon definition.
We also must agree on what green is, with all the various shades and hues.
So, if I point to the picture below and say, “This object in the picture is a green leaf.” I hope you will immediately disagree and call me a liar, simply because we have an agreement in the English language on what green is and what red is.
Representational Definitions – The Law of Identity
The first idea that is 100% true is the idea of representational definitions. A=A. Leaf=Leaf. Yet we also understand that this color my eye is seeing represents a wavelength of light reflecting off this object because of certain photoreceptors in my eye.
But to another animal or if the leaf is placed under ultraviolet light, the leaf may take on a very different appearance. Still, this particular leaf has a definition that equals itself.
Let’s put this another way –
- What do you know about yourself?
- Are you…you?
- Do you know all the facets of yourself?
- Do you know your current blood pressure or current temperature?
- Do you know the events of your first two months of life, how you were fed, and how that nutrition sparked certain cells to grow?
Of course not, but does that information constitute and influence who you are at this moment and play a role in your identity? Yes. Our trouble is that we don’t know the ultimate reality.
So what I am saying is not that we know everything about the object, but that the object has unique properties and characteristics that only it possesses.
However, that does not stop us from naming and identifying objects agreeing on what that definition means.
As we learn more about an object, that definition becomes more broad and nuanced; however, “A” will always equal “A.”
A single leaf will always equal that same leaf. Kolan will equal Kolan. God will equal God, even if we lack all the information.
This concept might seem confusing or silly to even consider, but becomes vitally important when we move into a comparative analysis of competing thoughts and religions.
If you don’t understand, check out the article, The Law of Identity.
What else do we know with 100% certainty?
Let’s go back to our green leaf. What if I said to you, “This is a green leaf and not a green leaf.” Well, that’s just silly.
- How can something be a green leaf and not be a green leaf?
- Do you mean the exact same green leaf?
Yes. How about when two different people make this statement. One person tells the class, “This is a green leaf,” and another person comes up, grabs the exact same leaf, and says, “This is not a green leaf.” Can both people be 100% right?
Both people can be 100% certain, but both statements cannot be true at the same moment and in the same relationship.
Law of Non-contradiction
So the second thing we know with 100% certainty is that “A” cannot equal “non-A” in the same manner and relationship.
This law of non-contradiction may seem again obvious or confusing, but if you really think about it, it is 100% true. We might not like the implications, but we are seeking truth, not appeasement. The difficulty is that the two statements come into direct conflict.
In the law of identity, we are trying to build a consensus to understand an object’s nature. However, in this instance, only one person can be correct and speak the truth.
The interesting thing is that the law of non-contradiction is dependent upon the definition or identity of the object in question.
In the case of the green leaf that is held up in class, the object is in the room, but the two people have to agree on what green is and what a leaf is.
However, the situation becomes murky when dealing with a being like God.
For us to search for God, either we define Him or we do not define Him. Want to learn more?
Check out the article; The Law of Non-contradiction.
Law of the Excluded Middle
In the last law, we have set up this third law that is 100% accurate. If you have something that has been identified as a green leaf, which is “A”, either “A” is a green leaf or “A” is not a green leaf.
The logic here is, if we identify something, that object is either itself or not itself. So let us use this idea in our search for God. Either God is all-powerful or God is not all-powerful. There is no middle ground. If God is anything less than all-powerful, He is not all-powerful.
Again, we are going to use this concept frequently when we evaluate the claims of God and religions. But these issues are dependent upon the law of identity and the definitions we ascribe to words and concepts.
Law of Mathematics
The fourth and final law of logic I want to address is the Law of Mathematics. There are so many math laws. Mathematical concepts are 100% true: addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and many more.
So A+A=2A. Many mathematical concepts are calculated or have proofs.
We will use some mathematical concepts when we deal with science. Now there will be other laws of logic some might bring up, but these are the oldest, well tested, and appropriate to use in our search for God.
What other concepts are 100% true? The laws from experience.
Everyone Will Die
Are there things in your life that you are 100% certain will happen? We already discussed that physical death is 100% true for humans, not by logic, but by experience.
Can you prove that a 30-year-old healthy person will die? Maybe not the exact moment of death, but experience tells us that at some point in the future this 30-year-old will physically die.
Check out my articles on “What is Death?” I can’t logically prove everyone will die, experience teaches us this physical truth.
Law of Causality
A second law from experience is the law of causality. Some want to argue this is a law of logic, others this is a law of experience. This is a scientific principle rooted at the heart of experimentation.
I am 100% convinced this law applies to everything in the universe.
Could there be something uncaused? Can things spontaneously combust? We will discuss these issues further in the article, “The Law of Causality.” Still, we know from experience that every effect we witness has a preceding cause.
These six primary principles are the building blocks we will use to search for God. Are they valid? Are they enough to find God?
Well, continue with me on the journey and if I stumble, please point out the flaws in my reasoning.
What Next?
- What is the crucial concept?
- There are six laws of either logic or experience that instruct us which are 100% true.
- Why is that significant?
- We need tools that are validated and trustworthy during our search for God.
- If you agree, the next steps
- If you disagree, please consider reading
References and Links
What do humans know?
Six Laws of Reality we know with 100% confidence.
- Denver Yoga Under Ground – Logical vs Experiential: The Experience
- Lauraz Powell – The Uncaused First Cause
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy – Identity