@@asukayin6487 everything is defined in relation to a larger system. E.g. an apple in relation to a tree. Trying to define something in relation to itself leads to an absurdity or circular reasoning. E.g apples in terms of apples. Likewise for humans to be properly defined requires God
@@neuronneuron3645 I don't think the first claim of everything being defined in relation to a larger system is correct simply on the basis of the "larger thing" not being a necessary component. I can in fact compare apples to other apples, there's no larger system there. Moreover, if you claim was true I don't think God necessarily needs to be invoked if your only criteria is having the system be something larger than the thing being compared to. However, I would like to know in what instance he reflects on himself without God?
@@asukayin6487 By apples I mean the universal category of apples. If we consider human as body and soul then the first might be described by larger natural systems but the latter requires God. From the first few sentences, he tells his story in relation to academia, the eighties etc. Also he behaves in a self-conscious manner. I haven't analysed all of his words and actions but given that he is a postmodern academic and that he has defined postmodernism as an 'incredulity towards grand narratives' it follows that God would be excluded. And his mode of being is then to be expected given that exclusion.
This guy is trying to reflect on himself without God and it's leading him in circles. The circles of hell
what?
@@asukayin6487 everything is defined in relation to a larger system. E.g. an apple in relation to a tree. Trying to define something in relation to itself leads to an absurdity or circular reasoning. E.g apples in terms of apples. Likewise for humans to be properly defined requires God
@@neuronneuron3645 I don't think the first claim of everything being defined in relation to a larger system is correct simply on the basis of the "larger thing" not being a necessary component. I can in fact compare apples to other apples, there's no larger system there. Moreover, if you claim was true I don't think God necessarily needs to be invoked if your only criteria is having the system be something larger than the thing being compared to.
However, I would like to know in what instance he reflects on himself without God?
@@asukayin6487 By apples I mean the universal category of apples. If we consider human as body and soul then the first might be described by larger natural systems but the latter requires God.
From the first few sentences, he tells his story in relation to academia, the eighties etc. Also he behaves in a self-conscious manner. I haven't analysed all of his words and actions but given that he is a postmodern academic and that he has defined postmodernism as an 'incredulity towards grand narratives' it follows that God would be excluded. And his mode of being is then to be expected given that exclusion.