1

If the universe encompasses all of causality does it contain all knowledge within in, and furthermore exist in all aspects of it? Or is there a paradox that limits its ability or a contradiction you can impose?

TheAutomaton
  • 335
  • 2
  • 12
  • 3
    What does "universe encompasses all of causality" mean, and how is it related to knowledge? If Hume is right there is no causality to encompass, if Christian theologians are right then God is the first cause and is not encompassed by the universe, if Kant is right knowledge requires cognizing subject outside of causality, so in a fully deterministic universe knowledge is a meaningless concept. Without some context on your view of causality and knowledge it is not even clear what you think the paradox is. – Conifold Sep 07 '17 at 03:20
  • It's to exclude the notion of other universes by stating that everything happens in ours – TheAutomaton Sep 07 '17 at 14:25
  • I'm not against the theory, it just makes the answer more complex – TheAutomaton Sep 07 '17 at 14:26
  • I think one point not mentioned by @Conifold is worth considering as well: Even if the universe was deterministic in a very distinct (non-probabilistic) sense, all we could say is that there may be all information contained in the current state of the universe, which can be very different from even the possibility of extracting all possible knowledge. My advice is to read on the actual meaning of all the terms used on SEP, as I am not sure the question is not simply throwing around concepts that hardly make any sense, taken together. – Philip Klöcking Sep 08 '17 at 10:32
  • "If the universe encompasses all of causality does it contain all knowledge within in" The universe encompasses it's contents, otherwise it would be called a partialverse. – Ronnie Royston Sep 07 '17 at 05:15
  • Do you define the universe as all space? Or all space and time? If there are "parallel universes" (multiverses), do you bundle them into the word "universe". Omniscience and omnipresence usually require sentience. Can the universe know anything if it's not sentient? –  Sep 09 '17 at 02:17

1 Answers1

1

Though you didn't define the word 'universe' clearly, I shall try to reach the answer in two ways.

1. Focusing on omniscient/omnipresent

I believe you have put everything in the word 'universe'. So I can use this word and omniscient/omnipresent synonymously. Then the first and the last words (whether omniscient/omnipresent is logical) become the sensitive part of your question. But logic, since it can't deny the material world, can't deny matter and energy. On going exploration into matter may compel logic to accept the word--'omnipresent'. Since it is logic 'consciousness' becomes essential to get a meaning to the word omniscient. And since logic can't accept that word (omniscient), this route will seem to be blocked here. Also the complete ignorance of the limits and limitations of 'consciousness' creates another block that prevents completely from moving forward.

Though this block can be overcome only by Truth Realization, it is not possible in most of our case.

2. Focusing on logic

(If logic accepts the words omniscient and omnipresent 'sensible')

When you ask whether something is logical (or skim off 'logical'), you treat the rest as 'illogical'. Then (If the answer is: "Yes. It is logical") what you considered as omniscient/omnipresent won't come under 'illogical'. In other words, when you say "Yes", what you considered as omniscient/omnipresent won't be so (since it is absent in 'illogical'). Similar is the case if the answer is: "It is illogical". That means, if something is omniscient/omnipresent it must be both logical and illogical.

When we use logic we depend on our intellect which actually emerges from our ego. This ego is the main obstacle in the path that is related to omniscient/omnipresent.

So, if you can't consider logic in a broader sense, when you treat omniscient/omnipresent you had better not pursue logic while going along the path of truth. If omniscient/omnipresent is the Truth a 'great' logic that transcends time will compel you to go beyond all the 'duals' including logic and illogic when you enter into it. I mean (since logic itself compels) we will have to consider the logic that accepts both logic and illogic.

The great men who entered it had taught the world based on their 'complicated logic'.

In short, we can say it is logical only if the word 'logic' is treated in a broader sense.

Even though it seems as a deductive reasoning you may refer what the Upanishad says:

As is the atom, so is the universe; As is the human body, so is the cosmic body; As is the human mind, so is the cosmic mind; As is the microcosm, so is the macrocosm

See the verses in this link also: http://greenmesg.org/mantras_slokas/vedas-om_purnamadah_purnamidam.php

SonOfThought
  • 3,743
  • 1
  • 9
  • 18