It takes a couple of reads to understand, but it’s a good analysis of some pretty major philosophical structures underlying the idea of God.
Hypothesis: Physics and mathematics are those discourses in which Nominalism involves no immediate contradiction.
By “Nominalism” I mean the claim that predicated natures are beings of reason.* When we say “John is a man” then the predicate can be viewed without immediate contradiction as an ens rationis, abstracted from the concrete reality of “John” or “this man”.
But there is an immediate contradiction in assuming the same thing about “John is real” or “a being”. The real is divided by contradiction from the unreal or the being of reason. One is free to see “being” or “real” as the limit of abstraction, but the limit is not homogeneous with what leads up to it – at the most general level one hits something that does engender a contradiction if it is seen as merely logical, abstract, or ens rationis.
But to leave it at this would give us the universe…
View original post 249 more words