Skip to content

The Devil’s Chaplain: God Cannot Create the Nothing

2022-04-27

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2022/01/08

Christian is a Philosopher that comes from Belgium. What identifies him the most and above all is simplicity, for everything is better with “vanilla ice cream.” Perhaps, for this reason, his intellectual passion is criticism and irony, in the sense of trying to reveal what “hides behind the mask,” and give birth to the true. For him, ignorance and knowledge never “cross paths.” What he likes the most in his leisure time, is to go for a walk with his wife.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is gnosis, not simply the Greek origin of the word, but the meaning in context today?

Dr. Christian Sorensen: I think that the concept of gnosis, both from the point of view of Greek origin and in the current context, is related to what would be the science par excellence, at the same time  that in the first meaning would be identified with the domain of supreme wisdom and therefore with philosophy in its most metaphysical sense; while in the second conception, it would refer to the sphere of individual scientific disciplines, that is to say: those that are subjected to the experimental-empirical method.

Jacobsen: What is Gnoseology? What is the origin, nature, and limit of knowledge?

Sorensen: In my opinion,  Epistemology consists of a critical analysis from formal logic of both : the principles or foundations and the extension of knowledge. The aforementioned, would be in order to establish the validity, but not necessarily their veracity. Regarding the origin, nature and limit of knowledge, from my point of view, these will be given by the dynamic interrelation between an individual reason that goes on becoming consciousness along time,  and a macro or universal reason that’s permanent consciousness ;  which  in the « zeitgeist »  of its essence or  nature, will respectively perceive and  reveal,  with the finality of getting hidden afterwards regarding the last, through what I  consider a process of revelation always unfinished.

Jacobsen: What is the container of the knowledge? What is this subjectivity with a capacity to know in the first place?

Sorensen: There doesn’t exists any container or content,  because there is nothing that delimits knowledge as such. Likewise, there is no subjectivity with the capacity to know, because the individual subject in itself is a knowing entity; which is completely different from conceiving it regarding the dimension « of with »,  which  refers to the sphere of having, and  therefore specifically alludes to a supposed capacity, that  would also partitionate the subject  of whom participates.

Jacobsen: How does this subjectivity differentiate from the objectivity with which it interacts and embeds as an integral part?

Sorensen: Actually there is no differentiation between subjectivity and objectivity, since the only thing there is, is a kind of role-playing where within the interaction between the individual and the  whole, these alternate  their passive and active roles without ever ceasing to constitute a single universal subject.

Jacobsen: Why do the vast majority of the world posit a world beyond these two – subjectivities and the objective – into the transcendental, supernatural in the form of a god or a singular “God”? What is wrong about this, especially in the dominant versions of Islam and Roman Catholicism? We have caused a decent stir in some of the Roman Catholic community in some previous articles, as we can recall.

Sorensen: I think that the error on the part of the majority of the world, is to posit instead of positivizing what they propose.  Probably it’s correct to refer about a reality as something related to the trascendental, or perhaps even going so far as to put the name of God on it.  The problem rises in my opinion,   when  the logical break occurs due to theological mythologies that  begin to adquire a character of apodiptic certainty, and pretend to disrespect intelligence, by introducing with forceps the dimension of the religious; which generally is accompanied by threats, since  they consider sacrilegious those cosmological explanations  that  demystify  their tautological inconsistencies. What happens in relation to the Islam and the Roman Catholic Church, is that both  cannot not be fundamentalist and reactionary, since the opposite would imply denying themselves to exist. In other words, they are what they are, due to the fact they fear luminosity, but  paradoxically  represent  darkness and obscurantism in every sense ; even though the two of them, justify their  origin and prevalence in our days, because deep down they tremble in the face of darkness, and wish to save themselves from it.

Jacobsen: These gods come with holy books, the Golden Rule, holy figures, myths, mores, norms, and the like. Whole communities form in rejection of them in a simple sense, in atheism. This is the dominant landscape: God or not-God (God¬God).What is wrongheaded about this dichotomy, too?

Sorensen: The issue of this dichotomy between God or not-God, is that it is a closed and circular  approximation which has a reververing effect,  since does not incorporates novel elements in order to make possible the divergent creation of distinctive ideas.  In my opinion, it would be necessary to introduce a third structuring element, for forcing to carry out a synthetic outcome between both dichotomies. The aforementioned, would eventually possibilite  through the conflict that produces the opposition of terms, the opening of a dialectical and dynamic process,  that could transform in a continuum, the  antithesis between being and not being, in which there would be a being that’s there; at the same time that the last, enters into  an eternal becoming  towards what will arrive to be.

Jacobsen: What should happen to metaphysics and ontology in this view?

Sorensen: Perhaps both would have to die and be born again, since it would be necessary to bury formal logic as we know it, and  more than  to develop a novel one, I would say to find out another logical conception. Regarding the last, I am developing indeed its operational terms. Despite the above, however, I am convinced that for discovering such logic, that in parentheses, I’m going to denominate it trinitarian logic, it’s enough with not doing anything.

Jacobsen: What should happen to epistemology in this view?

Sorensen: I think that epistemology should become independent from philosophy, and therefore it should  move on to integrate each science, in order to fulfill in the particular scope of them; a critical function in relation to their construction of knowledge.

Jacobsen: What is the importance of consciousness and being in Gnoseology?

Sorensen: In my opinion, being in relation to consciousness and gnoseology, would simultaneously manifest itself ontologically as something that exists, and existentially as somewhat that is existing. Without the last, the subject wouldn’t be able to  have  consciousness, in order to  recognize him not only as someone who knows and could have been knowing, but also  as whom in turns,  might be capable of critically judging himself, in what would be an awareness of the awareness ; and in terms of what I will denominate : second intention, regarding the procedural state of knowledge in  experience.

Jacobsen: Intuition is important. What is an intuitive spirit in Gnoseology?

Sorensen: It would be the indubitable capacity of instantaneous and non-discursive apprehension in its simplest expression.

Jacobsen: If Gnoseology was embodied, what would be its motto or catchphrase?

Sorensen: You don’t fool me.

Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Dr. Sorensen. 

Sorensen: I hope that helps.

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: