SRH – Proof of God even simpler... 28/12/2002

After a lengthy email to Richard it seems even simpler. The doctrine would be this

"That which we can name is not the whole truth."

Why? If the whole world was green then we would not be able to distinguish green from any other colour, there would be no colours. If we could not distinguish any colours then never would the occasion occur when we said "that is green". (This is what I failed to completely get my head around at school so its taken 16years! to confirm it in my own mind). What is single and undifferentiated we cannot distinguish or have a name for.

The corollary which is the new proof of God, is that, that which we have a name for must also have an Other, or must have been distinguished from something else. Thus a named thing can never be the whole truth because it must have a dependent other. Knowledge and Science which depends upon names and identities must always be limited to a plurality of distinguished objects, it can never seek the unnamed One. Plus it also follows that Knowledge and Science by very virtue of having names must exist in relation to some Non-Science and Non-Knowledge a distinction they depend upon for their very identity and existence. It is the persistence of ignorance that keeps knowledge so knowing. A named thing can never be complete.

So we have Mike Myers in Waynes World supposedly quoting Kierkegaard saying to Tia Carrere "If I name thee I negate thee" (I haven't read this), but this is the point, to name something is to distinguish if from other things, and therefore to define it negatively - probably the most romantic thing ever said in a hollywood film, and it only raised a laugh, whose mocking who (viz. Beavis and Buthead Movie, scene in the desert). So those like America, who claim any unique identity automatically define themselves negatively in relation to the world around them, then by appropriating this "we are Not the other Nations of the World" as their own identity, they have to reinforce the distinction again and again just like homosexuals (we are Not Women Likers), just like Christians (we reject the Un-Saved Non-Christian World) to confirm their own identity. This search for named identity is obviously a great sickness of the West.

Returning to God. Many "primative" religions have no name for God, and the Muslims refuse any images of him (and since man is in Gods image logically they ban images of people to). However if we are careful we can refer to complete systems as Q (as in the first proof), or God. If there is a named world call if Humanity, then there is in distinction a non-named world from which the human world gets its distinction, identity and meaning. This non-named world by (transcendent) inference only, not by actual mental distinction, is God. Those who confuse the name of God, with the named Human world are making the first mistake of religion, the mistake that has already given way to the death of God.