08.01.2013 Views

roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

What follows from this proof of such transcension? The<br />

world to be explained by positing the absolutely necessary being<br />

is itself either subject to the temporal series or not. If not,<br />

then it is not the world of our experience: for this last world is<br />

essentially characterized by temporal succession of effects, and<br />

it would thus result that this actual world of experience is left<br />

unexplained by the argument to an absolute being. If the world<br />

to be explained is subject to temporal succession, it follows that<br />

the world---which might then be that of our experience---is not<br />

the absolutely necessary being. [[198]]<br />

But might some part of the world be the absolute being for<br />

which we seek? Apparently and obviously not: for to be a part<br />

of the world-whole, such a being would be necessarily subject<br />

to that very temporality of succession which characterizes the<br />

world itself; else we would be making the self-contradictory assertion<br />

that some part of the world is not a part of the world.<br />

Consequently, it follows from a positive consideration of<br />

what is meant by an absolutely necessary being that such a being<br />

transcends the temporal world and is thus identical in this<br />

respect with the God of the highest theism. Incidentally, a similar<br />

analysis can be made in terms of the concept of space, but<br />

because the analysis proceeds almost point for<br />

point like that from the concept of time, it is here omitted.<br />

The negative argument.---If anything less than a transcendent<br />

being were the absolutely necessary existence, it would<br />

have to be one of the following (proceeding from subjective to<br />

objective): (1) myself, or some other self which exists in the<br />

world; (2) some other part of the space-time universe; (3) the<br />

space-time universe as a whole.<br />

Could an existing self in the world be the absolutely necessary<br />

being? I hardly think that such a position can be seriously<br />

maintained in the final analysis. My very existence is contingent<br />

upon its relation to the whole causal nexus of reality: I<br />

have not always existed, and my present existence depends

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!