Do these three things in man, being, knowledge and love, form a unity in him too?
Man is made in the image of God, although he is not equal to God, rather, very far removed from him: not eternal, nor, to say all in a word, of the same being. But because man is the image of God we find the same unity: we are; we know that we are, we know that we love; and we love that we are, and love that we know.
These things are sure, not bothered by sceptical questions; for they are not dependent from any deceivable senses. Because: if I were deceived, I would therefore be; and therefore I can know that I am. Moreover, I know that I love: because I may be deceived in my love, but even if I loved false things, I would know that I loved. Finally, who does not love that he is, because to be happy, one has to be, and who does not desire happiness?
[Note: the last backward transitivity of desire does not seem to apply. If we desire to be married to Mary (D(p)), but it is impossible to marry Mary without killing John (p ↔ q), it does not follow that we desire to kill John (D(q)).]
[Note that Descartes took the same argument for being as a starting point of his metaphysics: dubio, ergo (cogito, ergo) sum.]
Showing posts with label love. Show all posts
Showing posts with label love. Show all posts
Thursday, May 26, 2011
II.1 chapter 25
Do we not find the same trichotomy of being, knowing, and loving, in man?
In the philosophy we find the same trichotomy: it has been divided in physics, logic, and ethics. These three correspond to three necessary things with which a human artificer is able to make something: nature, education, use. [Compare the four causes from Aristotle: working cause (artificer), material cause (nature), formal cause (education), final cause (use).] Here within use I do not distinguish between use for a purpose and enjoying something, although we know there is this difference: the things of time should rather be used than enjoyed, because the last becomes the eternal things (but the opposite is often done).
If our nature would be from ourself, we would produce our own knowledge (and not have to learn it) and our joy would return to itself (and need nothing external); but as God is our creator, we have to learn from him and our joy has to be turned to him.
In the philosophy we find the same trichotomy: it has been divided in physics, logic, and ethics. These three correspond to three necessary things with which a human artificer is able to make something: nature, education, use. [Compare the four causes from Aristotle: working cause (artificer), material cause (nature), formal cause (education), final cause (use).] Here within use I do not distinguish between use for a purpose and enjoying something, although we know there is this difference: the things of time should rather be used than enjoyed, because the last becomes the eternal things (but the opposite is often done).
If our nature would be from ourself, we would produce our own knowledge (and not have to learn it) and our joy would return to itself (and need nothing external); but as God is our creator, we have to learn from him and our joy has to be turned to him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)