tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post7687481551979243184..comments2024-03-28T17:44:11.289+00:00Comments on Bruce Charlton's Notions: God must have direct, unmediated knowedge - and if God, then so must we (albeit distorted and partial)Bruce Charltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-47350378614623923562015-05-14T21:15:37.427+01:002015-05-14T21:15:37.427+01:00"So we must (it seems) think of direct knowle..."So we must (it seems) think of direct knowledge as having no mechanism, but simply being... direct."<br /><br />And yet we humans often find it attractive to use the metaphor of mechanism when speaking of it. For example, Baruch:<br /><br /><br />"Who has known Wisdom? Who has entered into her treasuries? The one who knows all things knows her; <i>he has probed her</i> <b>by</b> <i>his knowledge.</i>" (Emphasis added.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-80034416368638907572015-05-13T22:26:51.696+01:002015-05-13T22:26:51.696+01:00It seems to me that our God AS Perfection both cre...It seems to me that our God AS Perfection both created reality and flawlessly adheres to this reality at all times of its creation.Thordaddyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15887901925655428541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-71165248467797925422015-05-13T18:38:32.441+01:002015-05-13T18:38:32.441+01:00@Bruce C.,
I agree. What's interesting is tha...@Bruce C.,<br />I agree. What's interesting is that you have arrived by one line of reflection at the endpoint of a different line of reflection that I've embarked on, where I've been thinking what the point of being embodied is. Seems to me at root that if you can directly experience the material world, that is embodiment by definition. If embodiment is good, it means that interacting and experiencing material things are good--in a sense, having a relationship with things. The more you experience and interact with, the better. The best would be direct experience with everything.Adam G.http://www.jrganymede.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-47938850533228921962015-05-13T17:30:17.221+01:002015-05-13T17:30:17.221+01:00@Adam - I presume God gave us the possibility of d...@Adam - I presume God gave us the possibility of direct knowledge by more than one route - I mentioned by inheritance (because we are his children - contain a bit of divinity) and the Holy Ghost is another. <br /><br />My point here is that we could assume that God has direct knowledge of reality without having to assume either that He is omniscient or that he created everything from nothing - because omniscience and creation ex nihilo are actually secondary explanations for God's knowledge. <br /><br />We can legitimately assume God's direct knowledge of reality (simply assume it as an attribute of God) without believing any particular explanation for how or why God has direct knowledge. <br /><br />This simple assumption clears away (for me) a persisting difficulty about the nature of God and His status as God. <br /><br />Indeed, my current feeling is that this assumption (of God, by His nature, having direct access to knowledge) is implied by, and perhaps needed by, the standard Mormon account of the nature of God. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-60526271518377526122015-05-13T16:41:41.013+01:002015-05-13T16:41:41.013+01:00Seems to me that "direct knowledge" is w...Seems to me that "direct knowledge" is what qualia is about.<br /><br />One of the most intriguing passages in scripture for me is D&C 50, which suggests that one of the functions of the Holy Ghost is to create direct knowledge of each other between people.Adam G.http://www.jrganymede.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-63118361920598393312015-05-13T15:04:57.361+01:002015-05-13T15:04:57.361+01:00@David - As a (theoretical) Mormon, I regard God a...@David - As a (theoretical) Mormon, I regard God as within the universe, and not having created everything from nothing. <br /><br />But I am saying that God has direct, perfect knowledge of the universe he is within. <br /><br />God does not have theories about the universe, God knows the true reality of the universe. <br /><br />So God did not create reality/ truth; instead, God knows reality/ truth.<br /><br />And that 'knowing' is an important aspect of 'what makes Him God'.Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-61538525562540488802015-05-13T15:00:31.406+01:002015-05-13T15:00:31.406+01:00@ ANONYMOUS - (please use a pseudonym!)
Yours que...@ ANONYMOUS - (please use a pseudonym!)<br /><br />Yours question is not specifically answerable.<br /><br />Nobody can claim that any specific item of knowledge is 'direct' hence complete, unbiased and without possibility of error - because the human act of detaching a specific item of knowledge from the whole of reality, and drawing a line round it in order to discuss it, itself causes the possibility of errors, distortions and incompleteness. <br /><br />But I believe that *in principle*; without direct knowledge accepted as a 'given', then no knowledge at all is possible. <br /><br />(i.e. All real true knowledge must be based on, derived from, direct knowledge.)<br /><br />And *that* 'in principle' is pointing at direct knowledge. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-33132128918786699922015-05-13T14:58:57.624+01:002015-05-13T14:58:57.624+01:00"It struck me suddenly that God must have dir..."It struck me suddenly that God must have direct knowledge of reality, of truth, with no possibility of error - and that was perhaps the primary reason that He is God."<br /><br />Does this not imply that God is somehow separate to reality and conditioned by 'it'? As opposed to him being the creator of reality or 'truth'? Is truth separate to God? or do you mean that God has complete knowledge of himself as unmoved mover and we don't yet? But if we did know ourselves fully we would know the divine fully and become divine but quantitatively less? So both God and mortal beings are gaining knowledge of the truth but it is separate to both man and God? Or is my reasoning false?Davidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-74629543137709001312015-05-13T14:40:31.071+01:002015-05-13T14:40:31.071+01:00Does the ability of babies to learn to perceive th...Does the ability of babies to learn to perceive things such as carpets, toy blocks and parents count as 'direct knowledge'?<br /><br />What about the idea itself that direct knowledge is possible?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com