I found this posting at www.leithart.com extremely fascinating and sent me pensive for about 3 minutes. I'm wondering what y'all think about it:
"Karl Jaspers summarizes Cusa’s argument for an infinite cosmos: 'Because the cosmos is an image, it is infinite, but its infinity is of the imitative kind, which denotes endlessness, the possibility of always going further. In time, eternity is endless duration. In space, the infinite is the endless; in the division of matter, it is the impossibility of ever arriving at the smallest particle. Neither the greatest nor the smallest, neither the most distant boundary in space nor the smallest particle of matter, neither the beginning nor the end in time is accessible to us. When we conceive of the world as having been created simultaneously with time, we speak metaphorically of a beginning and an end of time, not in time. The cosmos is not infinite in the same sense as God, nor can it be conceived as finite, since no boundaries confine it. Thus the cosmos has no center and no periphery. If it has a periphery, it would be bounded by something else. If it had a center, it would also have a periphery, which it does not have. . . . As a copy, the cosmos cannot be contained between a center and a periphery. For God alone is both the center and the periphery. . . Neither the earth nor any other place is the center of the cosmos.'"
"Karl Jaspers summarizes Cusa’s argument for an infinite cosmos: 'Because the cosmos is an image, it is infinite, but its infinity is of the imitative kind, which denotes endlessness, the possibility of always going further. In time, eternity is endless duration. In space, the infinite is the endless; in the division of matter, it is the impossibility of ever arriving at the smallest particle. Neither the greatest nor the smallest, neither the most distant boundary in space nor the smallest particle of matter, neither the beginning nor the end in time is accessible to us. When we conceive of the world as having been created simultaneously with time, we speak metaphorically of a beginning and an end of time, not in time. The cosmos is not infinite in the same sense as God, nor can it be conceived as finite, since no boundaries confine it. Thus the cosmos has no center and no periphery. If it has a periphery, it would be bounded by something else. If it had a center, it would also have a periphery, which it does not have. . . . As a copy, the cosmos cannot be contained between a center and a periphery. For God alone is both the center and the periphery. . . Neither the earth nor any other place is the center of the cosmos.'"
I've been looking at this for three days and I really want to respond to it. Reading it, I feel a response but I can't find any words without reverting to non-euclidean geometry.
ReplyDeleteThough, I find I am reminded of the philosophy class I was tricked into taking Freshman year. We discussed space-time as a 4-D cylinder (x-, y-, and z-coordinate planes + time). We as limited beings can only see our tiny little point in space during the ever changing now. Or, within our own 'now', we can look backwards and see snapshots of what has happened before, but we can't conceive of everything everywhere through all of time, nor are we able to move ourselves by our own volition in either direction temporally. However, God is outside of the cylinder (for this one class day the professor actually allowed for an all-powerful being - how kind). He can see both ends as well as zero in on any and all particular points.
The quote above seems like a much more elegant and thought-provoking way of discussing that. Thanks for sharing it with us, Lucius.