On the interconnectedness of things

Posted by Etan on Monday, November 29, 2004 at 11:15 PM. Read 3499 times. Tags:
{name} pic

Throughout the past year interconnectedness has been a recurring concept in many pieces of film and literature which I have come across. In its simplest form interconnectedness breaks down into the idea that everything is connected together.

Why God Won’t Go Away states that every religion relies on a form of interconnectedness. Andrew Newberg, et al, claims that there are two forms of interconnectedness found in different religions. There is either a union of mankind with the rest of the world or a union of the individual with a greater individual.

The former is found in religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism. Hinduism explains the interconnectedness of self or Atman with others through Brahman. The latter form of interconnectedness is more complicated. This form is found in religions such as Christianity. Through intense prayer individuals feel a profound connection with Christ. Through this connection with Christ individuals realize a connection with all of humanity.

In I ♥ Huckabees we find a form of existential interconnectedness which is very similar to that of Buddhism. Bernard Jaffe presents us with a blanket which he says represents the universe.

Say this blanket represents all the matter and energy in the universe, okay? This is me, this is you, and over here, this is the Eiffel Tower, right, it’s Paris!

Bernard’s blanket is eerily familiar to the Buddhist analogy of Indra’s Net. Indra’s Net is an infinitely long net. Within each knot of the net is a multifaceted jewel which reflects each other jewel. This analogy is made in order to show that everything in the universe exists in a complex relationship with all other beings. Like Jaffe’s blanket, we are all connected to each other and while we may feel like individuals in reality we can’t tell where my nose stops and space begins.

Interconnectedness is not only found in religions. Atheists also believe in the interconnectedness of everything, this time it comes in the form of energy. One of the foundations of modern physics is that energy cannot be created or destroyed. The first law of thermodynamics says that the total inflow of energy into a system must equal the total outflow of energy from the system, plus the change in the energy contained within the system.

When I cease to exist, whether I go to Heaven or Hell or back to Earth in the form of another being, my energy must go somewhere. Like the Buddhist concept of reincarnation, my actions as a living being will have an effect on the future. Whether my karma results in a reincarnation or I have a reincarnation through scientific means (i.e. my carcass turns to soil from which a tree sprouts), my energy will have an effect on future life.

The atheistic concept of interconnectedness is summed up well through a scene in Waking Life. A purely scientific outlook upon the world leaves us with a problem of free will. If we are all physical systems then we all rely on the rules which govern these systems. We are all part of a system of cause and effect. This system of cause and effect leaves us with the question of how we make decisions, how we can truly choose to do anything.

This is a problem which has faced humanity since we have been philosophizing. Freedom of will versus determinism first took shape in the form of God making decisions for us, but even without an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being deciding our fate, we have this casual relationship between all beings which can remove our true freedom.

This causal relationship is the basis for human interconnectedness. An atheist may not believe that there is a soul or Atman at the root of our essence. Even without this belief we run into the concept of energy which has always existed and cannot be destroyed, we also are presented with a form of Buddhist conditioned genesis through causal relationships between all beings.

Interconnectedness is a concept which seems to reoccur in all social sciences. Sociology, archeology, religions, (and anti-religions) all come back to this concept of cause and effect. This link between all of us may not be psychic but it definitely seems to exist, whether through energy or some greater being.

Comments:

Page 3 of 8 pages « First  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  Last »

zilch Austria Posted on 12/02/2004 at 02:46 AM

zilch pic

theo said: Because it is in accordance to God’s will does not mean he did not see it coming because all things are accounted for in his plan.  Notice God’s will and plan are to very different things.  God’s will is rarely accomplished, but his plan is always accomplished.

Pig said, of Duns Scotus: The only problem with that solution is that it makes no sense.

Exactly.  Words merrily chasing each other’s tails, but no sense.  Could someone please explain logically how it’s possible for God to be omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent?

The problem of omnibenevolence is similar to the problem of “perfection"- you run into contradictions as soon as you consider the real world.  After all, the fox has a different idea of perfection that the hare.  But this isn’t about the real world, is it?

ellie said: An old testament class I had used a textbook that was in conjunction with scientists who explained how certain miracles could have occured not if you bend the laws of nature, but extend them...I guess.

There’s another way of describing this “extending” the laws of nature: being wrong.

 Signature 

You were born.  And so you’re free.  So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/02/2004 at 11:48 AM

THEOCRAT pic

Originally posted by elwedriddsche:
Actually, it’s perfect foreknowledge vs. free will.

I see no contradiction between knowing what will happen and us choosing what will happen.  The contradiction lies in us choosing what will happen and God choosing what will happen.  It’s like a long time married couple.  The wife knows when her husband gets up he is going to go downstairs and eat cereal for breakfast because that is the same thing he has done since they were married.  She knows what will happen but she didn’t choose for him.  Every morning he could have decided he would rather have toast instead.  He could still decide to have toast instead.  If he did it would just mean that the wife’s “foreknowledge” is not perfect.  In God’s case he knows what he will choose.  The choice is real there is no escaping it.  God’s foreknowledge does nothing to affect the choice being made.

Socialist Swine Canada Posted on 12/02/2004 at 11:59 AM

Socialist Swine pic

theocrat,

The wife knowing and God knowing are very different things.  The wife “knowing” that her husband will eat cereal doesn’t necessarily mean the husband will in fact eat cereal.  She could be wrong, though she “knows” he’ll eat cereal he might in fact have waffles. 

An omnimax God can’t be wrong.  If it knows that I’ll eat cereal, I will eat cereal, there is no chance that I will eat waffles.  For if I ate waffles God would be wrong and we can’t have that.  Moreover, an omnimax God would have known that I will eat cereal from the beginning of time, there was no time when I could have eaten anything other than cereal.  So while God might not force me to eat cereal.  The fact that he knows before I was born that I would eat cereal makes my apparent choice between cereal and waffles somewhat illusory at best (given from the beginning of time I could have chosen nothing but cereal for God to be omniscient).

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/02/2004 at 03:02 PM

THEOCRAT pic

Originally posted by Socialist Swine:
So while God might not force me to eat cereal.  The fact that he knows before I was born that I would eat cereal makes my apparent choice between cereal and waffles somewhat illusory at best…

I think we have different ideas of what illusory choices are which is ok.  I do not see the husbands choice to be an illusion in the least.  I would consider an illusory choice to be more like Winston choosing to love Big Brother in the very end of Orwell’s “1984” I’m making that statement hoping you have read that book of course, but you should read it if you haven’t.  Personally my favorite work of fiction.

zilch Austria Posted on 12/02/2004 at 03:20 PM

zilch pic

Etan- this thread is living proof of the interconnectedness of things.  We started with Buddhism and holism, and now we’re in 1984.  It’s all connected!

I think we have different ideas of what illusory choices are which is ok.  I do not see the husbands choice to be an illusion in the least.

theo, if you’re going to flog a dead horse at least take aim before you flail away.  Read what Pig said again and come back.

 Signature 

You were born.  And so you’re free.  So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson

deadscot United States Posted on 12/02/2004 at 04:18 PM

deadscot pic

theo, if you’re going to flog a dead horse at least take aim before you flail away.  Read what Pig said again and come back.

I’ll second that.

Theocrat - Two hours ago did your god know that you would post a response to Swine’s entry?  If so, could you have not posted it?

elwedriddsche United States Posted on 12/02/2004 at 06:39 PM

elwedriddsche pic

What all but theocrat said.

By merit of some entity having perfect foreknowledge about your future actions, you have no more than the illusion of free will. Anyway, there’s already a long thread in the forums on this topic…

 Signature 

Science is answers that must always be questioned.
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered.
Religion is answers that must never be questioned.
Politics is answers that lobbyists pay for.

Socialist Swine Canada Posted on 12/02/2004 at 07:40 PM

Socialist Swine pic

theo, if you’re going to flog a dead horse at least take aim before you flail away.  Read what Pig said again and come back.

I’ll third that motion....

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 04:22 PM

THEOCRAT pic

I’m “flogging a dead horse” because it has been in my experience with debate if everyone is not crystal clear on everyone else’s stances on the conclusion of a debate then when the debate comes up again later they will miss quote you because they made an assumption about your intentions.  I’m only trying to make things crystal clear.

I read what Socialist Swine said and I responded to it exactly as I meant to.  You have an illusion you have free will.  My mind says I have free will minus the illusion.  I was trying to illustrate the difference between our illusions using the reference to 1984.  What happened in 1984 is not the same thing as God and husband example.  They are different scenarios with different stimuli and different outcomes.

deadscot United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 05:13 PM

deadscot pic

My mind says I have free will minus the illusion.

So, are you lying to yourself or does your god not know what you are going to do?

Theocrat - Two hours ago did your god know that you would post a response to Swine’s entry?  If so, could you have not posted it?

I’m still waiting.

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 06:14 PM

THEOCRAT pic

I’m not lying to myself.

God does know what I’m going to do.

God did know I was going to post a response to Swine’s entry.

I could have not posted it but that would only mean that then God would have known I wasn’t going to post.  Because God does not reveal to me what mundane decisions I will make during the day, I get to choose what those decisions are.  His knowledge does not affect how I make my choices.

elwedriddsche United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 06:52 PM

elwedriddsche pic

I could have not posted it but that would only mean that then God would have known I wasn’t going to post.  Because God does not reveal to me what mundane decisions I will make during the day, I get to choose what those decisions are.  His knowledge does not affect how I make my choices.

Ah, no. I’m afraid you’re not paying attention.

The Christian god is supposed to have infallible foreknowledge about all of our actions. Either this infallible foreknowledge implicitely removes true choice or you have to abandon that this foreknowledge is infallible. Your choice.

An analogy would be the replay of a movie. The protagonist may not know how the plot unfolds, but nevertheless the outcome is already known to the director…

With a bit of googling, you can find a more formal description of this problem, e.g. theological fatalism, replete with objections and counter-objections. So far, it’s not looking good for free will.

 Signature 

Science is answers that must always be questioned.
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered.
Religion is answers that must never be questioned.
Politics is answers that lobbyists pay for.

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 07:07 PM

THEOCRAT pic

I don’t think infallible foreknowledge removes true choice.  I think predestination removes true choice.

The director of a movie knows what is going to happen to the protagonist, but the director does not intervene in the choices the protagonist makes to accomplish his mission or whatever.

I’d like to know why or why not my 1984 example is an example of illusory choice and what makes it different from the other examples.

Les United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 07:19 PM

Les pic

Elwed, we’ve covered this paradox on SEB in a couple places as well which I’m sure you remember. I always love it when True Believers have no problems ignoring the obvious paradoxes their claims generate.

Theocrat, please explain how God can know ahead of time what your choice will be without your choices being predestined?

For that matter a lot of Christians will claim that God knows before you’re ever born every single decision and action you will take in your life which, if that were to be true, begs the question of why he bothers with letting us live out our lives in the first place? He already knows who’s going to Heaven and Hell so the exercise of going through the motions is pointless and has no impact on the final outcome.

 Signature 

All I know is the wine lasts longer when you don’t gotta share it with someone
All I know is my steak tastes better when I take my steak tastes better pill
-- I Feel Fantastic, Jonathan Coulton

elwedriddsche United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 08:07 PM

elwedriddsche pic

Les, I know. I’m just waiting for somebody to offer a philosophical objection instead of apologetics. There are a few, although they’re either not convincing or unpalatable to the objector.

Theocrat, please reflect on the relationship between infallible foreknowledge and predestination.

 Signature 

Science is answers that must always be questioned.
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered.
Religion is answers that must never be questioned.
Politics is answers that lobbyists pay for.

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 08:28 PM

THEOCRAT pic

Originally posted by Les:
Theocrat, please explain how God can know ahead of time what your choice will be without your choices being predestined?

I thought thats what I was doing.  Predestined choices mean God chose what choices you make.  I am saying God did not do that.  God knew the choices, but did not make them for us.

Originally posted by Les:
For that matter a lot of Christians will claim that God knows before you’re ever born every single decision and action you will take in your life which, if that were to be true, begs the question of why he bothers with letting us live out our lives in the first place? He already knows who’s going to Heaven and Hell so the exercise of going through the motions is pointless and has no impact on the final outcome.

He lets us live out our lives because he cannot make our choices for us.  God is not constrained by time because he has power over it.  We do not have power over it and never will so we are forever constrained to the effects of time.

As I think about this more I have come up with a hypothesis.  We must be constrained to time because before the creation of the world Heaven and the angels were created as well.  The angels not being omnipotent (though still very powerful in their own rite) are constrained to the effects of time.  Upon the revolt of a third of them Satan and his minions were cast out.  Their punishment awaits them at the end of the world.  So while Satan takes full advantage of his power over the Earth and tempts God’s creation.  We go along in our lives waiting for his punishment as well.  These motions are not pointless because if anything God has a score to settle with Lucifer.  Now my mind is all over the place.  That probably wasn’t a satisfactory explanation for you, which I apologize for, but now I need to write down my thoughts before I lose them.

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 08:58 PM

THEOCRAT pic

Since God did not choose the choices for us they must be allowed to come to pass as we choose them.  I’m beginning to wonder if this is an optimism/pessimism issue.  All this thinking is giving me a headache.

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 09:00 PM

THEOCRAT pic

On another note, I like your name Les.  Unlike most people around here it’s short and easy to spell when quoting. grin

deadscot United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 09:06 PM

deadscot pic

Round and round we go. You’re not really getting this are you?  I really don’t know if can be any simpler than what Elwed already posted.

Let’s say god knows that you are going to eat out tonight.  He’s known this forever. Infallible foreknowledge.

You with me so far?

Okay, now here it is tonight and you’re faced with your choice.  Either eat out or stay in.  You decide to exercises your free will and eat-in.

Is that possible?  You do have free will, right?

THEOCRAT United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 09:21 PM

THEOCRAT pic

No its not possible for me to eat in if God knows I’m going to eat out.  I make my choice to eat out though and thus have free will because no one chose what I would do for me.  I’m still waiting for a reply to my 1984 example.  Please reply to that before asking more questions.  I’ve been more than generous answering questions and would like someone to answer mine.

deadscot United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 09:46 PM

deadscot pic

Since you’ve made it perfectly clear to me that you don’t have free will but the illusion thereof, I’m happy to move on.

If you would, please clarify exactly what you want to know about Winston and Big Brother.  It’s been a long time since high school but I can brush up on it if need be.

elwedriddsche United States Posted on 12/03/2004 at 10:20 PM

elwedriddsche pic

(theocrat) No its not possible for me to eat in if God knows I’m going to eat out.

But god knows every single thing you will ever do. Therefore, your life is completely predestined.

(theocrat) I make my choice to eat out though and thus have free will because no one chose what I would do for me.

Even if your choice seems uncompelled from your perspective, you have admitted that you must follow god’s script. Therefore, your choice is but an illusion.

I haven’t read 1984 in ages, so I’ll have to excuse myself.

 Signature 

Science is answers that must always be questioned.
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered.
Religion is answers that must never be questioned.
Politics is answers that lobbyists pay for.

Socialist Swine Canada Posted on 12/04/2004 at 02:43 AM

Socialist Swine pic

theocrat,

I’ll address your 1984 example.  I have read 1984 fairly recently (a year or two ago) and yes I will agree Winston’s choice in the end is coerced.  It was an illusory choice.  However, that doesn’t mean that freewill isn’t incompatible with an omnimax deity.  There is more than one way freewill can be undermined, and one of those ways is a fixed path for history.  Moreover, the ability to predict without error what will happen implies a fixed path for history.  As such if God knows what I’m going to do tomorrow I don’t really have any choice in the matter.  I might think I can do something other than I will, but I can’t actually.  If God knows I’m going to sleep in then no matter what time I set my alarm for I am going to sleep in.

zilch Austria Posted on 12/04/2004 at 05:50 AM

zilch pic

theo said: I make my choice to eat out though and thus have free will because no one chose what I would do for me.

theo, theo, theo, don’t you get it? If God has perfect forknowledge, which you claim, and if God is omnipotent, which I suppose you must believe, then He deliberately created us in such a way that we would choose exactly as we choose, and thus free will is an illusion.  We may believe we have free will, but we don’t- our choices are already made, by God.  We can play out our choices, but the script is already written.  God must have wanted us to choose as we do, for good or ill, or He would have created us differently; being omnipotent, this would have been no problem.

Not that I’m saying anything elwed, pig, deadscot, and Les haven’t already said.  If you don’t see the illogic of freewill assuming an omnimax God, I’m afraid there’s really no point in continuing the discussion.

 Signature 

You were born.  And so you’re free.  So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson

ellie United States Posted on 12/04/2004 at 06:13 AM

ellie pic

I’ve been out forawhile...long tournaments of Risk following Bible Study...I’m always the only girl, why don’t other women ever like that game?

This seems a repeat of many things I’ve heard before on all sides, & though I understand both sides, I’ve always had trouble seeing the relevance, except to find another reason to say that an unfair God hasn’t given us free will & He hasn’t chosen me, or we do have free will & God by definition isn’t God becuase S/He’s not all-powerful.

But it occured to me that th reason I’ve never thought it was relevant is that we’re assuming that who we are in space & time based on the only dimentions we understand is defined by our actions.  I think that’s only a small part of it, like how we only use 1-5-10% of our brain.  If our existence spreads byond time & into spirituality, & into the nature of the Trinity, our actions are of such little significance, that it doesn’t matter to what degree we choose them or not.  What matters is our identity beyond the realms we have the ability to understand.

I say again, I wanna hear from DoF..  downer

Page 3 of 8 pages « First  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  Last »

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys


Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


<< Back to main