Brian Leftow - Did God Create Abstract Objects?

Abstract objects, like numbers and logic, give God problems. Because they always exist and exist necessarily, abstract objects cannot be created or destroyed. But could God have created abstract objects? If so, how? If not, God would no longer be all-powerful and 100 percent sovereign, as theology requires, because he would not have created everything that exists.



Brian Leftow is the William P. Alston Professor for the Philosophy of Religion at Rutgers University


Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[alittax]

Thank you, Robert, for exploring all kinds of ideas in an open-minded, intelligent way, and for sharing your journey with us! Your programme has shaped the way I think about the world in a positive way! :)

[claudetaillefer]

In his essay "The Need for Abstract Entities in Semantic Analysis, " Alonzo Church makes a compelling case for the existence of abstract objects. Whatever the merits of Church's argument, one problem for friends of the doctrine of abstract objects is that it leads to ontological inflation: an extravagant ontology of never-ending hierarchy of abstract objects (sets) that makes for a crowded universe, a universe so ridiculously dense that it collapses under its own ontological weight! In mathematics, there are all kinds of schools of thought that more or less arbitrarily limit the "ontological sandbox", aleph 0 (which allows only natural numbers), aleph 1 (which also allows for real numbers), and so on. Some mathematicians (nominalists) claim they can do without abstract objects. Yet most mathematicians take the naive realist position that abstract objects are out there, somewhere, and that we discover them as an explorer discovers new territory. In any case, it seems to me that God, if there is such a Being, has absolutely nothing to do with the existence or non-existence of such objects. These objects are uncreated, they do not exist in time and space: they are dimensionless and tensessly exist. Perhaps even God can't make His creation from scratch: He needs some kind of readily available raw materials to build the world. The mathematical realm, with its many entities, would serve this purpose admirably. On this view God may well be the architect, the programmer, and abstract objects are His building blocks. Some might be inclined to challenge this common view and dispense with God, arguing that the stuff that makes up our reality emerges from mathematics, not God. This latter view deserves further consideration.

[richardburton]

"In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God." How would abstract numbers relate to the concept of the logos?

[LanceVanTine]

Brilliant! Leftow is one of my favorites! Always brings fresh insight and thoughts. Appreciate this channel as well!

[ricklanders]

Abstract objects do not exist, in my view. The "object" itself (a number, say) is a human construction that may, in a more or less limited way, point to a reality that to some extent might be said to exist, but the abstraction itself does not have independent existence apart from the human mind.

One way to further demonstrate this is to notice that even if we are referring to an apparently existing phenomenon (or phenomena) - there are six apples on the table, for example - the reality is that there's actually merely a condition of energy "on the table" that appears to us in that way (as "six") because of how our senses are configured. And the table itself is a condition of energy, as is whatever it's standing on, and so forth. So where is the "six?" Not only does the abstract object (i.e., the number itself) not exist, but even the general condition of "six" actually doesn't exist. In the most absolute and fundamental sense, no "six-ness" exists. There's only one self-existing energy "field" (or whatever we want to call the totality - not even one, in fact, but just its Is-ness) and every demarcation of/within that unified situation is merely an artificial human construct for the sake of convenience in describing and possibly understanding it (or let's say apparent aspects of it).

[cfarr]

God was the perfect abstraction for the few to gain control over the many. Fear of death laid the groundwork for the creation of the supernatural, and thus the continuance of life beyond death. The catch was that humans had to hand their minds over to the authorities.

Those authorities had already assigned themselves a monopoly with regard to communications with the God they had created. From there, appropriating the grand authority of that God was a logical and easy step.

And so authoritarianism was made much easier. If people were forced to accept the God narrative in exchange for not being tortured to death, exercising full control over their minds was a no-brainer.

Flash forward to today and the secular authorities have appropriated that grand authority. And their great promise is that we have freedom... freedom that is every bit as real as God.

[thomassoliton]

This is the most rediculous discussion I’ve seen here. What is an “”abstract object”? Our brains make associations and we call them symbols like 5 rocks on a table become 5, and we used to be able to buy a candy bar with 5 cents - which means something because you have the “neural” symbol for 5 and for a penny and a candybar in your brain. But do you honestly think God sits around and makes up symbols and sticks them in our brains so we are able to think about why we have five fingers? Lets hope he didn’t forget any important ones like … well, how would I know, , I’m not God!

[PetrusSolus]

Isn’t abstraction itself already an intervention on our part into an ordering of perception, and therefore conditionally, isn’t an abstract object already something that is the reified product of our own abstraction? As subjective beings we abstract all kinds of objects, through our inner experience, and our minds reify them, beginning with giving them names or words for reference. Now, did God secretly embed those names in us? If so, is He then conducting the activities of abstraction through us?

[edit]

Lawrence was sharp to pick up Brian's error; Brian says abstract objects do NOT exist, but rather he believes what God conceives of accounts for that abstract's objects existence (in this case the number 6). Lawrence is saying you're either saying abstract objects exist, or they don't, which is it? Brain thinks his "goddidit" answer allows for abstract objects to exist, but he maintains that abstract objects do not. Lawrence politely says it's the same thing, mate. Brian conveniently gets around this by slamming the God button; God is the beginning/creator of all things, so he precedes (and creates) even abstract objects. (...They also don't exist though, apparently!)

Moral of the story is you won't get very far with logic against any homo-sapien who has any sort of investment in anything, such is the nature of the cognitive biases. Such discourse is a fool's errand. Sue me, philosophers.

[Gruntfutuck]

Seems a bit like asking "Do unicorns create pixie dust?"

[jamesgardner]

"In the beginning GOD." Even before time GOD... I love this man's explanation: "I don't know because for me all things start with GOD." BROTHER JAMES 🙏🙏🙏

[godthecreatoryhvh]

Hi to all of you and Dr Lawrence to, of course. Let see that like this. God is a guide, God propose concept to nature, propose to the Cosmos and on and on. Being hurt on earth I just meditate if you want and propose looking at the night sky or the sun or the day sky. The concept is simple but as you go deeper is more complex as usual. Have nice day 😎

[lukemcgregor]

I think, maybe we have it backwards? What if "god" it's self is an abstraction? What if the concept of an all powerful creator who makes the universe from the top down is upside down?
In nature we see structure is built from the bottom up. Atoms build stars and planets, and they make galaxies and cosmic webs. What's the next level up from that? Looking at pictures of the cosmic microwave background radiation, or the cosmic web, it's pretty clear that, relative to these large scale structures, we live on a sub atomic particle.

[oremazz]

God creating tangible stuff and also creating intangible ones put humans without a free will at all. In some way is like saying all of what our children do is because of us. Tangible stuff like quarks, leptons, bosons, and antimatter symmetric particles are more or less followed by physical laws (cause-effect) up to the big bang. Here comes the other big question that is not part of this video. Returning to intangible stuff like math, ethics, language, ideas, and all the abstract existence is in my point of view, created by a few and discovered by the rest of us. The effect (abstract) is created by tangible entities (cause). In other words, the tangible universe creates the intangible one; abstract existence DEPENDS on tangible stuff to be sustained. Any abstract depends on humans, animals? books, computers, etc for their existence. Example: If one has a secret and later dies, the secret also will not exist; it depends on the person that holds it. Another example: Math is created by each human that develops it for the first time and later is discovered by us through knowledge transmission; there is no need for God as the cause-effect understand in the universe creation. Regards

[tomrobingray]

Is this not just a rehash of Bishop Berkeley? What if abstractions are part of God?

[jamesruscheinski]

Could abstract objects transition from necessity (existence) to contingency (cause and effect)?

[robertdegruchy]

I guess I'm an empiricist. But using the apple analogy, if we can see, feel, toich and or taste an apple and there are six of them, the "sixness" of the group is not abstract but a physical property
Can one be a complete skeptic and doubt the actual number of objects? To my way of thinking, designating or describing the number as 6 in this instance is neither abstract nor arbitrary. Interesting discussion I must say

[robertdegruchy]

Very interrsting analogy- I would argue that there are six apples on the table and since we are perceiving 6 of them, they cannot be "abstract" or not a hallucination (that would be the condition). They exist.Now we might ask: did God make them and place them?

[Light_EnterTainmenT]

Imagine, if you would be alone in this world and just woke up and see that you are thirsty and need water and have water there who kills your thirst ...you get hungry and there are bannaas and veggies, you have ear to listen you have eyes to see ..there are rivers, oceans, blue sky, day and night coming and going.. what would you conclude??
1. There is nobody except you
2. There is somebody.

[dyinteriors]

I am tiring of Closer to Truth! None of the subjects he interviews can ever sufficiently present a shred of evidence for this god they claim exists, yet he never calls the question when presented with more and more complete nonsense. I still am waiting for someone to tell us this god of theirs is something more than a pure presupposition. This interview was just more of an endless stream of mind numbing nincompoopery!