(February 4, 2014 at 6:00 pm)bennyboy Wrote: If we figure them out, then we are NOT limited by our nature from comprehending them. The question is whether there is anything that is necessarily incomprehensible due to some limitation in the human condition.
How would you even make that determination? If something is that far beyond us, then I am only more prone to mistrust those who claim to make special exceptions whenever they suit him.
If God behaves in ways we don't comprehend and his motives can't be known, then those who claim to comprehend him and know his motives are liars.
Quote:Can a worm comprehend Mozart? No. Can a monkey comprehend math? No. Given any animal, it's easy to see that there are things that species will never comprehend. For it to be different for humans, we would have to be a truly perfect species, without natural limitations. Believing this to be the case surely must be irrational anthropocentrism. How would the worm even KNOW that it is missing out on Mozart? How would a person even KNOW that he is missing out on ____________?
Could any of these creatures eventually evolve to the point where they could comprehend these things? Do we even have the knowledge to suggest that they don't comprehend them in their own ways? Do we have the conceit to suggest that there is a correct way to comprehend them?
Quote:Not when infinite things are not impossible, and even one of them can satisfy the OP argument. Arguing that one SPECIFIC thing is not impossible, so is likely real, is terrible. Arguing that SOMETHING that we cannot conceive, ever, is real, is perfectly reasonable, since it doesn't require imagining people to be infallible gods.
Suggesting that something is beyond our comprehension doesn't by itself indicate that there is actually something there we aren't comprehending.
