"'[The Wayland computer] didn't bother coloring the squares or the pieces, knowing quite well which was which. That's why I didn't see at once we're actually on a giant chessboard.'" (p. 256)
Film makers would have to resist the temptation to colour the squares and pieces.
CHAPTER TEN.
"'You must know what sensory deprivation does to an organic sophonts. Our computer rescued itself by creating something complicated and unpredictable to watch.' He paused before adding slyly, 'I refrain from suggesting analogies to the creator you believe in.'" (p. 261)
("...an organic sophonts..." is in the text. I did not notice it until quoting it.)
The analogies would be invalid. A sophont that is used to sensory inputs is harmed by sensory deprivation whereas a sophont that has never had any sensory inputs would not be a sophont in the first place. Consciousness and thought are of something. They have objects. A being that, before the creation, had had no objects either to be conscious of or to think about would not be conscious and therefore would not be motivated to create. He would be in a dreamless sleep and, as a conscious being, non-existent.
Self is recognized as such only by contrast with other. Self and other are interdependent like up and down, in and out, above and below, high and low, left and right, north and south or east and west. A person or self-conscious being has a personal history or biography consisting of memories of interactions with other such beings whereas a being with no memories of any interactions would not be conscious.
God as conceived by theologians is omniscient - another impossible concept, I argue - and therefore would not find anything unpredictable.
5 comments:
Sean,
The Trinity doctrine arose because the Fourth Gospel deified the Son and personified the Spirit yet remained monotheist. Thus, three divine persons but only one God = Trinity. This was not a response to the philosophical argument that self and other are independent. If "eternity" means no time, then God begins and ends simultaneously, i.e., does not exist: the temporal equivalent of a plane with zero depth. If "eternity" means beginningless and endless time, then what is changing? Time requires change.
Paul.
Paul: If I understand the theology correctly, it's not that God is omniscient in the sense we conceive of it, as that God -encompasses- and -contains- time itself.
God has -observed- the whole of the universe from beginning to end, but that's Time, and God is not -in- Time.
He doesn't experience a sequence of instants, but everything everywhere at once -- in 'eternity'.
(i) This sounds un-Biblical. The OT deity acts and intervenes in time.
(ii) I know that God is believed not to experience a sequence of instants but then how does He exist as a conscious being? Everything at once sounds like a single instant. Can anyone or anything exist without duration?
Kaor, Paul!
In that case we cannot agree. We start from different first premises: I affirm the divine and supernatural origins of Christianity, which you disbelieve in. My point was not to refute you but to state the revelation of the Trinity answers your objection.
And I agree with Stirling that God encompasses and contains and observes all times and events at once. I believe that answers your objection.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I believe that it raises more questions than it answers.
Paul.
Post a Comment