The Dilemma of Finiteness
In order for the
mind - us - to decide and choose the best course of action in a given a situation we must
assess the environment via the senses only -- sight, hearing, smelling etc. But this
assumes 3 things.
1. The mind is unlimited in its ability to make a complete and
accurate assessment of what is out there in order to make that right choice.
2.
We are only material and the observable physical world is the only
reality we need to explore. Therefore our physical senses are all that is
needed to make an accurate assessment.
3.
There are several possible choices that may be beneficial instead
of only one “best choice” in any given decision made (i.e.
there are no absolutes). Therefore making the “right” choice is not necessary
or even possible. So just make the most of it -- if it feels good, do it -- and do
the best you can. This, in essence, is at the heart of existentialism and our culture today.
However, regarding
the first assumption, our mind is finite. We are not all-knowing,
all-seeing, or everywhere present at the same time. So how can we, unaided, know with certainty that we all the information needed to know if we are pursuing what is the most favorable course and option? We can not. There may be reality/truth out there needed - that we
do not have access to because of our limitations - which might prove the course
we have taken is not the best choice. Due to our finiteness, we can not make that determination
unaided, i.e. alone.
(Admittedly, I am assuming -presupposing - two things. There are absolutes, i.e. the universe has design. Everything - including us - operates best when operating according to that design. If we operate outside of that design, we do not function properly).
Also, there is someone other than us that has infinite, absolute, and perfect knowledge. Since we do not, we must confide in this other person to know it ourselves.
But we all must start somewhere precisely because we are
finite. Every system posits (puts forth without evidence) certain presuppositions, whether you are a theist, atheist, or agnostic. I simply choose to start
with the belief that there is a God who by definition is the first cause of all
things (and therefore also design). But I don't pull that position out of the air. I think there is
objective evidence to back it, more so than not (which is an entirely
different discussion). One I allude to throughout many of my other posts and touch on some here. (I may post a more extensive blog on this in the future)
Also because we
are spiritually inert (though some deny that we even have a spiritual dimension. For more on this separate discussion click
here) and are only left to depend on our physical senses and the physical
world/universe to observe - or so we believe - we potentially dismiss a whole
realm of reality that may exist and be crucial in order to make an accurate assessment of reality i.e. the metaphysical or reality
beyond the physical. It’s the admission that we are more than physical, as well as being spiritually inert, that we, in our postmodern world,
have a hard time acknowledging.
If we are a
product of time plus chance, there is no absolute right or best way (except maybe "survival of the fittest" has resulted in some sort of consistency in how things operate). However, evolution is always progressing so in this sense it can't be absolute. This
is the assumption we are only material and there is no other reality.
But
if we are the product of design, there must be a Designer who made
things to operate according to design i.e. a specific purpose. That includes
you and me. If so, then violation of that design results in things breaking down, just like putting water in the tank of a car instead of gas. The car was made - designed - to run on gas. Put anything else in the tank and you have problems.
Some go to the other end of the spectrum and say we are only spiritual and the material world is basically an allusion. This, in essence, is Neoplatonism. This is a separate issue not addressed in this post. I don't fully address it but touch on it here.
I propose there
are 3 significant realities many deny that we must
acknowledge if we are to make an accurate assessment of what is true, and therefore the best
course of action to take (at least practically if not intellectually).
1.
We are finite (few will deny we are physically unable to travel a
million light years and back in the blink of an eye or be in two (or multiple locations) at the same time. Some may argue this is an unrealistic standard, however, this is actually as close as we can get to what God claims of himself i.e. omnipresence. If there is such a being, then this would be the standard by which we define being finite or infinite).
2.
We are not just material. There is more to reality than just the
material world e.g. what is love and where does it come from.
3.
We are created and not a product of chance, therefore we are designed
with a purpose..
Because we are finite beings (something most people would agree with), and because we are more than just physical matter, if we were also created or designed—yet we refuse to acknowledge these realities—then our understanding of the world cannot be grounded in truth.
This means we are unable to accurately judge what is truly best or what is actually true. In other words, we act as if we can figure everything out on our own, without any help or limits, as though we ourselves were infinite. But that very assumption prevents us from seeing things clearly and making good decisions.
To say it another way, if we believe there
is nothing outside of or beyond the physical world, we won't look or consider there is
anything beyond the physical for any realities that might be there which are vital to making an accurate assessment of things/truth.
Because man is
finite, he must always operate out of trust i.e. no one, including the atheist lives without
faith; without trusting something or someone in order to function in the world
with some level of direction, meaning, and purpose (whether that is subjective
and created meaning as with existentialism or objective meaning).
Yet, if we
believe we are a product of time plus chance, there is no absolute purpose or
meaning to our existence (objectively anyway. We have to create meaning - a key tenant of existentialism).
Also if we believe we can make an accurate assessment of reality on our own, we
will not be open to or interested in looking outside of ourselves for
information that may be vital to making that assessment and
will therefore be unable to make the best choice i.e. a choice rooted in the reality of who we are and the world we find ourselves in.
So we have a
dilemma. In order to know with certainty, we are
pursuing what is the most favorable course of action we must assess all possible
options. To make that assessment we must have access to
all possible facts/reality i.e. we must have infinite knowledge
of all realms, spiritual as well as physical. This requires our being
everywhere, at all times in all realms, with an infinite capacity
to take in all that we observe at any (or even every) given moment.
But how can we if
we are finite? We can not be everywhere to assess everything in order to know
with absolute certainty we are pursuing the best course. Nor can we be certain in our current state that the material universe is all there is.
What do we do? We
must trust. When all is said and done, no matter what world view you take, you
must place your faith in something or someone, whether that be in yourself
(with your limited ability to observe), other finite men/women (also with limited ability - even collectively) or a supreme
Creator i.e. God, who by definition knows everything, is everywhere present and
is obviously all-powerful... He did, after all, make everything. A basic tenant of the concept of God.
Since all of us
are finite we can never know for sure if we are making an accurate assessment
of things and therefore whether our trust in ourselves or our fellow finite humans
will lead to an accurate understanding of reality. We must look outside
ourselves and depend on another. No matter which direction we go, we must exercise trust by the mere fact that we are not infinite but limited. Either we trust in ourselves
and there is no reality out there that contradicts our conclusions (and hope we
have it right) or we must find someone else we decide to trust in, count
on, etc.
Of course the
best person to count on would be someone who has complete knowledge (unlike us) of every
possible reality (who must be everywhere present to do so) and has complete
understanding of who we are (is all-knowing) and what is best for us and totally committed (all-loving) to what is best for us as well as the
complete ability to give us what is best (all-powerful). Only then would we
have any possibility of finding the truth or the best course to take.
Side note:
Christ also experienced this dilemma of being limited during His incarnation.
He didn’t have infinite knowledge or power to know or take the best course of
action (at least not solely within himself as a man. He did have access to
all of this in his Father however). For the first time, in a new and different way, He had to completely
depend on someone other then Himself. He had to depend on His Father in a way
He never experienced before. But what was different about Christ compared to us
or even Adam was in each instance He trusted His Fathers assessment and
direction completely, even to the point of letting it kill him (how God would be loving and good in doing this is another discussion that has to do with man's rebellion. For more on that discussion click here and here). He believed His
Father always directed Him with complete love, wisdom and power on the best
possible course to take. And His trust proved to be well placed. When it was
all said and done, He was resurrected to new life by His Father and to a state of existence possibly greater-richer than it was before becoming a man.
The only way the mind can know for sure what is the most favorable course to take is to seek the
direction and help of someone who, unlike us, does have infinite knowledge, not
only about what is out there but about us. Someone who knows
what it is we most need and most favorable to our well being, as well as the ability to obtain
or provide it. We normally assume that person is us, but how can it be in light
of our limits.
The irony is many unbelievers assert the belief that there is nothing beyond
this life i.e. we don't live forever, we come to an end, we are finite. While
at the same time taking a position that our finite mind can somehow come to a
place of absolute certainty (which requires infinite knowledge) i.e. the finite can make an infinite determination unaided by the infinite. So we contradict ourselves. We believe we are finite in saying life ends once we die while at the same time making assertions that requires infinite knowledge.
Even when the agnostic says we can not know anything with certainty, he or
she is making an absolute statement i.e. a statement of certainty. Maybe
we can, in fact, know enough to know we are living based on
truth/reality. It's just not knowledge we can arrive at and determine unaided.
Nevertheless, this too is a position of faith (in someone outside of ourselves); only the object of faith has changed.
Vital to our trust in someone else is knowing they care about us and have our
best interest at heart at all times and in all circumstances and the
ability to provide that best (typically we assume-believe this is us). And who would
know better than the infinite Creator who made us? But if we do not acknowledge
or believe there is such a being, we are alone to sort things out and can only
hope we get it right at best. Otherwise, there simply is no point to
existence at all.
A Shift…but
related
This raises even
more basic questions. Why do we choose or feel the necessity to choose at all i.e. to make the right choice? What is the end we are seeking in our choosing? Why do we even seek anything and what
exactly is it we are seeking? What is it about us that drives us to seek and
choose one direction over another?
If we are a
product of time and chance (the atheistic evolutionist model), there is no explanation or point to our existence
much less these longings for meaning/purpose i.e. our coming into existence was
an accident at best and not deliberate, intentional, or with purpose, therefore our existence is meaningless.
Yet everything about us says the opposite and cries out for an understanding of
why we exist (Is this not the primary quest of science or space
exploration or philosophical debate?).
What is love, for example, and why do we enjoy loving and being loved. Where
does that come from if we are a product of time and
chance?
We are "haunted" by the question of why we are here. But why are we
even haunted? What causes it... the "haunting?"
There is something about our makeup that cries out for meaning and purpose. In
fact, studies have shown that a newborn's growth is stunted both physically and
emotionally (and even death can occur) if an infant does not receive adequate attention (i.e. emotional support) through
physical contact. Not unlike it would also physically suffer if it didn't have basic
physical needs met, such as food, shelter, water, and air. Certainly, an infant
isn't this way due to an errant or misplaced belief system. This occurs before
they have completely developed cognitively. This occurs on an
"emotional" or dare I say spiritual level and not an intellectual/rational level.
This drive for
meaning and the desire to choose or to understand what is the best course of
action belies the assertion that we are merely physical and a product of time plus chance.
It belies the assertion that life is meaningless and pointless. Where does this
longing and drive for meaning come from?
Simply stated the
best explanation for why we seek these things is because we are not a product
of time and chance as the atheistic, evolutionist model suggests but we are the product of a real and
personal Being who created us to have a real and personal relationship (i.e. love) by and with Him. And
this is a being who not only made everything but on whom everything depends on
for their day to day existence and operation. This means this being is of infinite value to everything else for without Him nothing would be that is; no air, no sun, no
earth, no plants, no animals or no breath, no eyes,
ears, touch, taste or smell to enjoy these external things. No loved ones, no
love, no relationships. In short no “us” or anything else that we enjoy.
Some reject this
notion of a Supreme Being/Creator outright and most reject it practically i.e.
the majority live as if this is not true even when they give lip service to it (as is the case with a majority of those who self-identify as Christians). However, if they do reject this idea of a Creator, they again are left with the uncertainty of
why they exist.
They also must
deal with the enigma of why they even care about why they
exist. Why do we feel this gnawing need to answer the question at all? (Of
course many never even consider this question with any seriousness until they
are facing the prospect of their life ending).
If we are an accident i.e. the product of time and chance,
we shouldn't even be asking the question much less wondering or
caring what the answer is. The very desire to know the answer to the question
betrays the assertion that we are the result of impersonal time and chance or
that we just are here for a time and eventually cease to be. That’s it. We fade into infinite nothingness. There
is no point to our existence, therefore stop asking the question and either just get on with your meaningless and pointless life the best you can or end
it.
This is at the
heart of existentialism. Since there is no meaning objectively i.e. there is
nothing “out there” that explains or gives meaning to our existence, we are
only left to create meaning subjectively. However,
this again begs the question. Why do we feel the need to find and create
meaning at all, so much so that we must create it when it doesn’t objectively
exist according to this belief system? This is also why some existentialist
suggest suicide is the only logical conclusion to their understanding of
themselves and the world. There is no actual point to our existence, so why
keep existing/living. We all die anyway so why prolong the misery; just end it and stop this maddening desire and pursuit for meaning. Ironic, if you think about it. If you say, "but I enjoy life." I say give me a good logical reason based on your view of the world. You have none.
It is ironic that our need for meaning is such that once one concludes there isn’t
any; we feel compelled to end our life to put us out of the pain of a
meaningless and pointless existence. Why do we feel pain at all? Where does
pain come from? That very compulsion to find meaning and avoid pain contradicts
the conclusion that life is pointless and meaningless and screams we are
designed to have meaning and if we can’t get it, then we feel compelled to just
end our lives.
For a further discussion of pain, you may find the following worthwhile.
Glossary of
basic terms and concepts touched on above:
Metaphysics - a
branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental
nature of being and
the world.
Traditionally, metaphysics attempts to answer two basic questions in the
broadest possible terms:
1.
"What is there?"
2.
"What is it like?"
Ontology - the philosophical study of the
nature of being, existence, or reality. It is part of the major
branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, that
addresses
questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist.
Cosmology - the philosophical study to
understand the origin, progression, structure, and ultimate fate of the
Universe at large and of us as individuals.
Epistemology - the study of knowledge
·
What is knowledge?
·
How is knowledge acquired?
·
To what extent is it possible for a given subject or entity to be
known?
