Logic, Spirit, and Truth (John 4:23-24) The question is, Exactly, what is truth? Most relevant to that question is the role and limits of logic and rational analysis. A quote by the brilliant psychoanalyst Viktor Frankl who argued that man's "Will to meaning" is a vital and pivotal drive in human beings, also said, perhaps echoing unknowingly St. Gregory of Nyssa's unshakable understanding that God is beyond words and beyond comprehension,
Peeling Bananas
Ellie said, “Yes, I understand. It is just like peeling bananas.” I was a little flustered. Here I was trying to explain Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem, talking about the German philosopher Heidegger and Einstein’s understanding of scientific theory - really deep stuff. And Ellie was comparing these the works of these immortals to peeling bananas. I thought to myself perhaps this might be going over her head. I tried to think of better ways to explain the complicated concepts. I paused.
Ellie smiled then she asked, “Logically, what is the best way to peel a banana?” It would seem to be common sense how to peel a banana. You grab the neck of the banana, and with a sharp tug, snap the neck. Then, you grab the edges of the banana skin and peel them back. Then I thought that sometimes the neck of the banana doesn’t break away clean, and that if I bend the banana neck back too hard, I would end up squashing the top of the banana. At which point, I would take take a knife and cut the neck off. Then I was like – “Hmmmm?” The thought crossed my mind that, perhaps, the most logical method of peeling a banana, could possibly be to have a laser cut the skin of the banana, so you could then peel it.
She had a point. I said, “Yes, you are right in a way.” If you take all the axioms of Euclidian Geometry, you still cannot prove that parallel lines never meet. So, in the same way you cannot prove that snapping the neck of the banana is the best way to peel a banana. That is the essence of Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem. Perhaps that is oversimplified, but still, in a nutshell, that is the Incompleteness Theorem.
Godel’s Theorem of Incompleteness
Kurt Godel, the Austrian mathematician, in 1931, proved that any mathematical system will be incomplete, which oddly enough is called the Incompleteness Theorem. Gödel Incompletenss Theorem proved that all formal systems will either be incomplete or inconsistent. That is, there will always be questions that cannot be answered, using a certain set of axioms, and you cannot prove that a system of axioms is consistent, unless you use a different set of axioms. Also, Godel mathematically demonstrated that within all effective systems (as in a computerized program) of natural numbers which are consistent, those systems will contain true statements that cannot be proven. A philosophical implication is that the truth of a system of rational thought cannot be collapsed into a logical system of symbols.
Palle Yourgrou writes, “One of the most dramatic results of Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem is precisely to establish that one cannot collapse the (semantic) notion of mathematical truth into that of (syntactical) concept of proof within a given formal system.” (p. 146) That is, the meaning of a system cannot be determined by the logical arguments within the system. Proof cannot “simulate truth.” Any system of thought, no matter how complete, will, still, in the end, be incomplete. In the final analysis, “Logic” does Not equate to “Truth.”
A Theory of a Theory: Heidegger and Einstein
The German philosopher Heidegger argues that the existence of Truth can only be inferred from the capability of being able to prove a statement true or false, and he refers to logic as the “theory of a theory”. Neil Bohr, a physicist who won the Nobel Prize in 1922, expressed the problem this way: we can only know objective reality as it appears to us, and as we participate in the measurement of reality. That is, facts are as much a construct of a theoretical system as a theory is based upon the facts. To put it another way, “A theory of truth is a theory of how truth can be determined.” (p. 18 Value)
Einstein describes science as a conceptual system of propositions that ‘connect to’ and organize sense perceptions. He then goes on to say, “Beyond that, however, the “system” is (as regards logic) a free play with symbols according to (logically) arbitrarily given rules of the game.” Einstein always kept in mind that scientific theories are abstractions of reality and truth, and that theoretical abstractions are, in essence, ‘fabrications’ that can be potentially construed in many different ways. Einstein elaborates on that thought when he writes that it is “equally clear that knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be. One can have the clearest and most complete knowledge of what is, and yet not be able to deduct from that what should be the goal of our human aspirations.” (p. 42, Ideas – my italics)
Logic requires if-then statements, in which causal phenomenology is inherent, which means that science is a mechanistic approach. Substance is reduced to molecules, and molecules to atoms, and then atoms are reduced to quarks. All the interactions can be explained, according to scientists, as a causal chain of predictable reactions. That is, one event causes another event which causes another, and so on. Science defines a system, a set of predictive action and reaction reduced into a mathematical description of these phenomena. One of the limitations of causal thinking, however, is that cause-effect will always become an endless regress. Cause and effect would seem to have no beginning or end. Yet systems, by their nature, are self-defining and self-perpetuating. That is, all theories inherently have the characteristic of being theories of theories, as it were.
Beyond Comprehension and Spirit and Truth
Human consciousness cannot comprehend eternity. The human brain simply does not have the capacity to comprehend “Absolutes.” As St. Gregory of Nyssa observed, God is beyond words and beyond human comprehension. Furthermore, all consciousness is limited and constrained by the subjective nature of its being, and, for people at least, the conceptualization of creation consists of subjective ‘rationalizations, intuitions, and an ideological-emotional perspective.
The opening passage in the Bible, Genesis 1:1, states: “In the beginning God created the heaven and earth.” That sets a limit. No one asks who or what created God. The Midrash, which is teachings that endeavor to discover the significance or relevance of scriptural text, points out that, “He [God] is only known as God after creating heaven and earth. Thus, it is not said ‘God created’, but ‘In the beginning created God heavens and earth’; He is not mentioned as God until after He created. “(Gen. Rabba 1 p.56 Tales and Maxims from the Midrash) From that viewpoint, “creation” just “is,” and must be accepted as such.
Jesus Christ’s profound insight in John4: 23-24 that one should worship [God] and understand [God] in “Spirit and Truth” would seem a pretty down to earth perspective on how to comprehend and understand the All. Conceivably, it could be argued that one might need “Spirit”, especially in terms of intuitive understanding and grasping the world through innate drives, to engage and grasp the world in order to understand the “Truth.”
Content Copyrighted Copyright ©
References and Footnotes
American Psychological Association: https://www.apa.org/
Association for Psychological Science: https://www.psychologicalscience.org/about/links.cfm
Albert Einstein comprehensive website: http://alberteinsteinsite.com/
Albert Einstein Biography: https://www.biography.com/people/albert-einstein-9285408
Godel’s Theorem of Incompleteness: https://www.jamesrmeyer.com/ffgit/godels_theorem.html
John Bargh, PhD: http://bargh.socialpsychology.org/
https://www.rogerdooley.com/john-bargh-priming
http://www.psych.nyu.edu/bargh/index.html
Rupert Sheldrake: https://www.sheldrake.org/
Viktor Frankl: http://www.viktor-frankl.com/
Viktor Frankl: http://www.viktorfrankl.org/
Dr. Harold Koenig: https://spiritualityandhealth.duke.edu/index.php/harold-g-koenig-m-d
Dr. Harold Koenig: https://medicine.duke.edu/faculty/harold-g-koenig-m-d
Roy Baumeister: http://www.roybaumeister.com/
Roy Baumeister: https://psy.fsu.edu/faculty/baumeisterr/baumeister.dp.php
Dr. Paul Wong: http://www.drpaulwong.com/
Dr. Paul Wong: https://positivepsychologyprogram.com/paul-wong-biography/
Clifford Geertz: https://www.biography.com/people/clifford-geertz-9308224
Carl Jung: https://www.biography.com/people/carl-jung-9359134
Carl Jung: https://www.psychologistworld.com/cognitive/carl-jung-analytical-psychology
12 common Archetypes: http://www.soulcraft.co/essays/the_12_common_archetypes.html
Emile Durkheim: http://durkheim.uchicago.edu/
Emile Durkheim: http://faculty.rsu.edu/users/f/felwell/www/Theorists/Durkheim/index2.htm
William James: https://www.biography.com/people/william-james-9352726
William James: https://study.com/academy/lesson/william-james-psychology-theories-lesson-quiz.html
Tania Singer references: http://cultureofempathy.com/References/Experts/Tania-Singer.htm
https://charterforcompassion.org/discovering-empathy/dr-tania-singer-and-the-neuroscience-of-empathy
Dr Amit Sood Mindfulness: https://www.mindfulleader.org/amit-sood
Dr. Harold Koenig Director, Center for Spirituality,
Theology and Health: https://spiritualityandhealth.duke.edu/index.php/harold-g-koenig-m-d
Dr. Koenig on what spirituality can do for you: https://www.beliefnet.com/wellness/health/2006/05/what-religion-can-do-for-your-health.aspx
Keith Karren – Body, Mind, Spirit:
http://pgrpdf.abhappybooks.com/mind-body-health-keith-j-karren-ph-d-pdf-5716009.pdf
E O Wilson Biodiversity: https://eowilsonfoundation.org/
E O Wilson - PBS on Ants: http://www.pbs.org/program/eo-wilson/
Anthropologist Malinowski: http://anthrotheory.wikia.com/wiki/Bronislaw_
MalinowskiSocial Anthropology - Malinowski: http://scihi.org/bronislaw-malinowski-social-anthropology/
St. Augustine (Catholic source): https://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=418
St. Augustine: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/augustine
Konrad Lorenz: https://www.age-of-the-sage.org/scientist/konrad_lorenz.html
Konrad Lorenz: http://www.famouspsychologists.org/konrad-lorenz/
St. Gregory of Nyssa (Franciscan): https://www.franciscanmedia.org/saint-gregory-of-nyssa/
St. Gregory of Nyssa (wikiorg): https://orthodoxwiki.org/Gregory_of_Nyssa
Neuroscientist Stanislas Dehaene: https://www.edge.org/memberbio/stanislas_dehaene
Imants Barušs, psychologist and parapsychologist: http://www.baruss.ca/
Julia Mossbridge, psychologist and parapsychologist: https://noetic.org/profile/julia-mossbridge
https://sharingthesearch.com/tag/j-mossbridge/
https://www.closertotruth.com/contributor/julia-mossbridge/profile
Friedrich Nietzsche: http://nietzschecircle.com/
Nietzsche biography: https://www.biography.com/people/friedrich-nietzsche-9423452
Abraham Joshua Heschel: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/abraham-joshua-heschel-a-prophets-prophet/
Iroquois:
http://www.ushistory.org/us/1d.asp
Greek Mythology: Apollo and the Oracle of Delphi
https://www.greekmythology.com/Olympians/Apollo/apollo.html
https://www.thoughtco.com/apollo-greek-god-sun-music-prophecy-111902
http://greek-gods.info/greek-gods/apollo/
https://www.coastal.edu/intranet/ashes2art/delphi2/misc-essays/oracle_of_delphi.html
https://www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/background/7_p1.html
https://www.ancient-origins.net/myths-legends/pythia-oracle-delphi-001641
https://www.ancient-origins.net/myths-legends/pythia-oracle-delphi-001641