The Christian says, “God exists, and
he loves me.” The atheist says, “God does not exist.” The
pantheist says, “all that is, is God.”
The philosopher says, “What do you
mean by 'god'?” and “what do you mean by 'exists'?”
So what is 'God'?
I believe in unicorns. They are
magical, horse-like creatures possessing a single horn in the middle
of their foreheads. Their touch heals all disease, and they can only
be tamed by the virtuous and the virginal. The term 'unicorn'
exists, it is well defined. Presented with a phenomenon, I can
instantly make the choice and say, “this is not a unicorn,”
although I have never seen one. Unicorns exist; they are conspicuous
by their absence.
Professor von Meeces. |
Sitting next to me right now is
Professor von Meeces. He loves meeces to pieces. Professor von
Meeces is a cat. He is a phenomenon, a signifier as the semioticians
say, that corresponds to the sign 'cat'. He has pointy ears, a fuzzy
tail, and dainty cat feet. He enjoys wandering the neighborhood at
night, ear scritchies, and taking extended tongue baths (which is his
current activity, as my hands are otherwise engaged in typing). He
is white with grey splotches on his head, body, and tail.
But Professor von Meeces is not 'cat'.
He is a four-dimensional representation of the symbolic archetype
'cat'. 'Cat' is the intensional defenition; P vM is a member of the
extension. He is a member of the set of all cats: {..., Professor
von Meeces, ...} whose sign is 'cat'. 'Cat' exists, because
Professor von Meeces is one; he is a cat. He is also bored, and
leaving to find something fun to do.
'Justice' is a sign, and intensional
definition. As such, it must describe an exstensionally defined set.
There must be phenomena that are justice. But as Sir Terry reminds
us, we may grind the universe as finely as we may, and we will not
find one particle, one molecule, one atom of justice. So although
the sign 'justice' exists, finding it is necessarily difficult. We
must decide from moment to moment if any given phenomenon is in the
extensional defenition of 'justice'.
So what of God? Or perhaps, to say,
what of 'God'? God is a sign that points to phenomena, like
'unicorn', 'cat', or 'justice'. But 'God' is tricky to define,
perhaps trickier than 'justice', 'cat', or even 'unicorn'.
John of the
epistles says that “God is love”. So perhaps by the principle of
transitive equality, we can sat that 'love is God'? Upon further
investigation, we find that people use 'god' to mean many different
things, at different times. So much is godlike, or perhaps indulging
in an archaism, godly. God is mercy, but also justice. God is
peace, but is also righteousness. 'God' is a semantic variable, it
points not to a set of phenomena, to a set of signifiers, but to a
different set of signs. 'God' means different things to different
people at different times in different places.
And so the philosopher asks, “What do
you mean by 'God'?”
------
Googlebombing for a cause: www.minnesotangos.org
------
Googlebombing for a cause: www.minnesotangos.org
1 comment:
Very nice.
That is all.
Post a Comment