Poetry, Philosophy, or Science?
March 22, 2014 at 4:37 pm
(This post was last modified: March 22, 2014 at 4:38 pm by Mudhammam.)
In reading The Mind's I: Fantasies and Reflections On Self and Soul by Douglas R. Hofstandter and Daniel C. Dennett, I came across this beautiful passage by Stanislaw Lem called "Non Serviam." I think both atheists and believers will find this reading compelling and thought-provoking. Here are some of my favorite quotes:
"The game necessarily possesses the logical feature that for unbelief in Him God may not punish anyone, If it is a definitely unknown whether a thing or not a thing exists – some merely asserting that it does and others, that it does not – and if in general it is possible to advance the hypothesis that the thing never was at all, then no just tribunal can pass judgment against anyone for denying the existence of that thing. For in all worlds it is thus; when there is no full certainty, there is no full accountability. This formulation is by pure logic unassailable, because it sets up a symmetric function of reward in the context of the theory of games; whoever in the face of an uncertainty demands full accountability destroys the mathematical symmetry of the game, se then have the so-called game of the non-zero sum."
"In postulating God, we postulate a continuation of the game beyond the world. I believe that one should be allowed to postulate this continuation of the game, so long as it does not in any way influence the course of the game here. Otherwise, for the sake of someone who perhaps does not exist, we may well be sacrificing that which exists here, and exists for certain."
"For this reason nothing is due God; neither love nor hate; nor gratitude, nor rebuke, not the hope of reward, nor the fear of retribution. Nothing is due Him."
Read the entire passage here:
http://themindi.blogspot.com/2007/02/cha...rviam.html
"The game necessarily possesses the logical feature that for unbelief in Him God may not punish anyone, If it is a definitely unknown whether a thing or not a thing exists – some merely asserting that it does and others, that it does not – and if in general it is possible to advance the hypothesis that the thing never was at all, then no just tribunal can pass judgment against anyone for denying the existence of that thing. For in all worlds it is thus; when there is no full certainty, there is no full accountability. This formulation is by pure logic unassailable, because it sets up a symmetric function of reward in the context of the theory of games; whoever in the face of an uncertainty demands full accountability destroys the mathematical symmetry of the game, se then have the so-called game of the non-zero sum."
"In postulating God, we postulate a continuation of the game beyond the world. I believe that one should be allowed to postulate this continuation of the game, so long as it does not in any way influence the course of the game here. Otherwise, for the sake of someone who perhaps does not exist, we may well be sacrificing that which exists here, and exists for certain."
"For this reason nothing is due God; neither love nor hate; nor gratitude, nor rebuke, not the hope of reward, nor the fear of retribution. Nothing is due Him."
Read the entire passage here:
http://themindi.blogspot.com/2007/02/cha...rviam.html
