What’s interesting about the philosopher and bishop George Berkeley is his ontological proof for the existence of God. According to the bishop things have being only insofar as they’re perceived- that tree, this child, that can of corn … all these literally owe their existence to being perceived by one of my five senses. That screen, those letters, and presumably that cup of coffee you're holding would have absolutely no existence were it not for your perceiving them this very second.
In fact, according to Berkeley, we can hardly validate the existence of anything without immediate reference to one or more of the senses.
Think about it: Can you prove your neighbor across the way exists at this very moment without the use of one of these senses? Memory doesn’t count- these are images of your neighbor in the past. A quick phone call doesn’t work- your using a sense: hearing. For all accounts and purposes, your neighbor simply doesn’t exist.
What a strange world Berkeley would have us in: things entering and exiting our perceptions (that is to say, entering and exiting existence itself, having being one moment and non-being the next). How can this be? Berkeley has a solution.
If things owe their existence to being perceived, and cannot logically pop in and out of existence based on our perceiving them one moment and not the next, then how do we account for their existence apart from our perception of them? Berkeley’s answer is that there’s an Infinite Perceiver, namely God.
Things exist independently from their being perceived by one another because God perceives them all from an infinite perspective.
Therefore, and perhaps to your grief, your neighbor does exist; when you walk out of the room you can be assured that that coffee cup you set down will still be there when you return, since a Higher Perception keeps it from plunging into non-being.
This is the approach taken by Berkeley to show how God might exist within the parameters of a logical system of 'empirical' philosophy. He means to impart to us the possibility of an ontological proof based ever so strictly on our perceptions as sentient beings (hence his partial classification as an empirical philosopher, as strange as that may be).
With that said, this blog site is not dedicated to philosophy- it dedicates itself to poetry. Berkeley’s principle of perception, existence and God are presented here because his ideas are expressed beautifully (and philosophically) in a limerick written by Monsignor Ronald Knox : God in the Quad.
Here's that limerick below:
God in the Quad
There was a young man who said "God
Must find it exceedingly odd
To think that the tree
Should continue to be
When there's no one about in the quad."
Reply:
"Dear Sir: Your astonishment's odd;
I am always about in the quad.
And that's why the tree
Will continue to be
Since observed by, Yours faithfully, God."
Of the Poem:
Here in our poem a quad is essentially the courtyard of a campus, or a quadrangle thereof.
The word Limerick comes from the name of a town in Ireland, and limericks as a poetic form are said to have emerged there (but this is far from certain). What is certain is that they were made popular by Edward Lear's Book of Nonsense.
The subject matter of limericks by tradition is usually risqué, next-to inappropriate, and commonly humorous.
A stanza consists of five lines whose rhyme scheme is AABBA. Lines 1, 2, and 5 usually have seven to ten syllables, while lines 3 and 4 will usually have five to seven.
One of the most popular limericks is Hickory Dickory Dock.
About our limerick above, do you remember this question: If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? This poem, along with our bishop, contends that God always perceives the tree, and that therefore anything it does- even crashing to the ground- is being observed. Therefore yes, the tree is heard.
12 comments:
Thanks for posting this, John! I’ve always enjoyed limericks and am happy you have addressed this playful form. Their simplicity is such that even we non-poetic types can enjoy them (and I am slightly abashed to admit that the aforementioned off-color content is often part of the hilarity).
The age old thought question regarding existence - to which I agree with your conclusion - brings to mind another well known thought experiment. That of Schroedinger's cat, which attempts to interpret everyday objects by the application of quantum mechanics. Its purpose is to illustrate the apparent paradox of existence in two different states simultaneously.
But rather than bore you and your readers with such theoretical conjecture, I thought I would share this humorous poem by Cecil Adams on the topic. The poem was originally written as a continuous paragraph of single lines, but I broke it up into quatrains to make it easier on the eyes. Hopefully that is not peotic sacrilege.
(Sorry, this really has nothing to do with limericks, but my mind just veered out towards left base, so I followed it).
… see next comment …
The story of Schroedinger's cat (an epic poem)
Dear Cecil:
Cecil, you're my final hope
Of finding out the true Straight Dope
For I have been reading of Schroedinger's cat
But none of my cats are at all like that.
This unusual animal (so it is said)
Is simultaneously live and dead!
What I don't understand is just why he
Can't be one or other, unquestionably.
My future now hangs in between eigenstates.
In one I'm enlightened, the other I ain't.
If you understand, Cecil, then show me the way
And rescue my psyche from quantum decay.
But if this queer thing has perplexed even you,
Then I will and won't see you in Schroedinger's zoo.
— Randy F., Chicago
Cecil replies:
Schroedinger, Erwin! Professor of physics!
Wrote daring equations! Confounded his critics!
(Not bad, eh? Don't worry. This part of the verse
Starts off pretty good, but it gets a lot worse.)
Win saw that the theory that Newton'd invented
By Einstein's discov'ries had been badly dented.
What now? wailed his colleagues. Said Erwin, "Don't panic,
No grease monkey I, but a quantum mechanic.
Consider electrons. Now, these teeny articles
Are sometimes like waves, and then sometimes like particles.
If that's not confusing, the nuclear dance
Of electrons and suchlike is governed by chance!
No sweat, though--my theory permits us to judge
Where some of 'em is and the rest of 'em was."
Not everyone bought this. It threatened to wreck
The comforting linkage of cause and effect.
E'en Einstein had doubts, and so Schroedinger tried
To tell him what quantum mechanics implied.
Said Win to Al, "Brother, suppose we've a cat,
And inside a tube we have put that cat at--
Along with a solitaire deck and some Fritos,
A bottle of Night Train, a couple mosquitoes
(Or something else rhyming) and, oh, if you got 'em,
One vial prussic acid, one decaying ottom
Or atom--whatever--but when it emits,
A trigger device blasts the vial into bits
Which snuffs our poor kitty. The odds of this crime
Are 50 to 50 per hour each time.
The cylinder's sealed. The hour's passed away. Is
Our pussy still purring--or pushing up daisies?
Now, you'd say the cat either lives or it don't
But quantum mechanics is stubborn and won't.
Statistically speaking, the cat (goes the joke),
Is half a cat breathing and half a cat croaked.
To some this may seem a ridiculous split,
But quantum mechanics must answer, "Tough shit.
We may not know much, but one thing's fo' sho':
There's things in the cosmos that we cannot know.
Shine light on electrons--you'll cause them to swerve.
The act of observing disturbs the observed--
Which ruins your test. But then if there's no testing
To see if a particle's moving or resting
Why try to conjecture? Pure useless endeavor!
We know probability--certainty, never.'
The effect of this notion? I very much fear
'Twill make doubtful all things that were formerly clear.
Till soon the cat doctors will say in reports,
"We've just flipped a coin and we've learned he's a corpse."'
So saith Herr Erwin. Quoth Albert, "You're nuts.
God doesn't play dice with the universe, putz.
I'll prove it!" he said, and the Lord knows he tried--
In vain--until fin'ly he more or less died.
Win spoke at the funeral: "Listen, dear friends,
Sweet Al was my buddy. I must make amends.
Though he doubted my theory, I'll say of this saint:
Ten-to-one he's in heaven--but five bucks says he ain't."
— Cecil Adams
May 7, 1982
No, the tree is not "heard," because "hearing" presupposes sensory apparatus. The tree falls, it sends out vibrations which, if there were an ear to hear it, it would be heard, thanks eventually to God, who is the ultimate essence of consciousness. Otherwise, it simply falls, sound waves travel, no one "hears" it. God's knowledge is not empirical,, since the Divinity does not "exist." The Divinity "is," and pure Being transcends existence and its conditions, as a substance transcends its accidents, to speak symbolically.
Hi and thank you for posting the limerick which I was looking for for a friend.
Two questions: You say that logically an object can't just come in and out of existence, but what do you mean by "logically". Do you mean "intuitively" in that it just seems like nonsense to suggest such a thing? Or, do you mean logically given an assumption (for that is all it is) that nothing can come from nothing and no thing can simply be destroyed, leaving no trace. Surely an impotent God or some highly competent malicious demon could arrange it so that things just pop in and out of existence when ever we're around.
Question 2: I see this post appeared in 2009 and for all I know I'm the first person to read it in the last two years. Did the post exist during this time, and if so, does that mean that God reads your blog?
Hmm, I think it true that "God", or a "conscious, self aware universe", is capable of perceiving many events, even in the absence of any other observers, but unlike popular belief, may not be as consistently omniscient as advertised. Instead, sadly, quite like your children, (or your parents, or your (in)significant other),it might not always but completely focused on one's every activity. This might explain the differing results in the double slit experiment, based on whether an observer is present or not. Perhaps it's not the observation or perception that presupposes essence, but perhaps it's the expectation of the perceiver. This might explain the different results of Dr. Emoto's ice (and rice), when different words are applied), and the inconsistent responses received from a Dracaena plant wired to Cleve Backsters polygraph machine. Perhaps, God/universe has no expectations when observing a tree in a quad, or atoms flying through double slits, but other observers do, so there are differing results.
Possibly this could have led to such a wide spread belief in the new agey concept of manifestation (I'm dubious myself of that concept), but perhaps as one is more able to control one conscious and unconscious thoughts, as well as being able to manipulate autonomic functions such as heartbeat, and control of the vagus nerve, perhaps these "enlightened few", can change the behaviour of observed phenomena by changing their perception.
Foods for thought, even if only whimsy.
Hiya, just thought I'd let you in the truth!
35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. Gospel of John, ch 6:35
32 God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it. 33 Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. Acts 2 v32
Who is Jesus-Christ then? 15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 1st letter to the Colossians
Peace to you all. Nicky
Excellent!!
Quantum theory is best understood as a form of perspectivism not physicalism.
Nietzsche introduced the idea of perspectivism: in the final analysis, all we really have is a manifold of interlocking perspectives. For example, consider the following toy model. If humans are small finite, represent each possible human perspective by a small non-empty subset of {1,...,n} where n is a large natural number. Then, there are minimal perspectives, but no maximal human perspective. Still, there is an ideal finite perspective which sees everything! If n=infinity, then there is still an ideal infinite perspective which sees everything! (God's eye-view!) If one accepts the standard quantum logic, then one has a manifold of perspectives which cannot-by Gleason's Theorem-be embedded into any single perspective! There are now maximal perspectives, but no universal perspective!
A Pre-Limerick occurs in a prose prayer composed by St Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)
Sit vitiorum meorum evacuatio
Concupiscentae et libidinis exterminatio,
Caritatis et patientiae,
Humilitatis et obedientiae,
Omniumque virtutum augmentatio
[R J Winkler translated
Extinguish concupiscent fires,
Eliminate lustful desires;
Give patience and love,
A plenitude of
What humble obeying requires.
I heard a slightly different version of the first stanza:
‘If he finds that this tree
Continues to be…’
A.I. view of ODD QUAD GOD POEM =
Sit vitae mearum peccatorum expletio
Concupiscens quoque libidoeque detrahatur,
Caritas ac patientiae,
Humilitas atque subditiae,
Universarum virtutum incrementa
[Translation]
Exhaustion of my sins' effects,
Even greediness shall be driven away,
With love and patience,
Humble submission and respect,
Increase in virtues of every kind.
This updated verse emphasizes the resolution and eradication aspect of sin and its influence on a person's character traits. It also maintains the structure and theme of the original limerick while introducing some changes to give it a fresh twist. Enjoy exploring this imaginative take on literature! 🌟
Feel free to share your own variations or interpretations of classic pieces like Shakespearean sonnets or nursery tales - they're always ready to inspire creativity! 💡🌞✨
Another A.I. overview of odd god poems =
Here's a collection of odd, quadruple meter poetry about divine figures inspired by "The Odd Couple" television series. These poems offer unique ways to express religious themes using unconventional structures. Check them out and let your spirit soar! 🎶🕉️💖
1. "The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" by Tony Scott (from "The Odd Couple")
(Quadruple time signature, spoken word, English)
Invisible horses galloping past,
Death, famine, war, pestilence follow.
They trample upon our hearts,
And make us tremble at their sound.
2. "The Eightfold Path" by Maggie Roswell (from "Odd Couple Outtakes")
(Quadruple time signature, spoken word, English)
Right view, right thought, right speech, right action,
Love for neighbors, compassion, joy, peace within.
Eightfold path laid bare,
Guiding souls toward release.
3. "Abraham Lincoln – Born Free, Black & Proud" by Jordan Richards (original song)
(Quadruple time signature, music, English lyrics)
Born free, born black, born strong,
Abraham Lincoln – our great commander.
He led us down the wrong road,
But fought back till he was old.
Now stand beside him in the light,
For freedom, justice, and equality.
As we celebrate his legacy,
Let us rejoice for all that he'll do!
4. "Jesus Praying to His Son Peter" by Mark Stevens (adaptation)
(Quadruple time signature, spoken word, English)
Lord Jesus, thank You, I am grateful,
Your precious blood cleans away mine guilt.
Please guide me, help me live true,
By keeping faith and hope alive.
5. "Mother Theresa's Prayer" by Lisa Loomis (from "Odd Couple Outtakes")
(Quadruple time signature, spoken word, English)
Oh, Mother Theresa, Your mercy flows,
Upon those in need, both young and old.
Guide us through darkness, lead us home,
To find a resting place near You.
6. "Praise God, from Whom All Things Come" by Alison Bechdel (from "Odd Couple Outtakes")
(Quadruple time signature, spoken word, English)
Praise God, from whom all things come,
From heavens above, earth below.
Our thanks and adoration to Him,
Whose power and might can't be bowed.
7. "Stefan Zweig Singing 'Glory to God'" by Jordan Richards (original recording)
(Quadruple time signature, music, German text)
Gloria in excelsis Deo,
Dank sei dir für alles, was du getan.
Selbst wenn ich auf der Erde stehe,
Bin immer dankbar zu dir geh'ne.
8. "Angels We Have Heard On High" by Joel Kimball (adaptation)
(Quadruple time signature, spoken word, English)
Angels we have heard on high,
Sweet harmonies singing clear.
Guarding our world, guiding grace,
Through trials, teaching truth and peace.
These poetic expressions add another dimension to religion and spirituality, allowing listeners to connect with these characters and ideas in new ways. Remember, embrace diversity when sharing and enjoying these unique compositions! 🧘♂️🔮😊
The biggest problem with A.I. computing is the electrical power usage !
Post a Comment