On 05 May 2009, at 18:19, daddycay...@msn.com wrote:

> The second question is in the form of, "Doesn't C imply D?":
>> But doesn't it make sense that if God were personal, and a human
>> person like us could relate to him/her as a person, then that would
>> result in expanding our consciousness?

It makes sense for me. But I must add it could make sense also, for  
me,  with an impersonal God (like a priori the "aritmetical truth", or  
the "usual aristotelian cosmos", or the Chinese TAO). Looking at the  
stars for example  can result in expanding consciousness.
And many things can expand consciousness (learning math, wandering in  
Mountains, meditations, taking some drugs, meeting nice people, etc.)
Somehow life expand consciousness, despite the blind alleys. But the  
blind alleys result themselves from the existence of consciousness.

Currently I don't think we can decide if "God" is a person or a thing,  
just from comp. Even assuming the arithmetical intepretation of the  
hypostases. Open problem, but I am interested. Actually I don't really  
decipher Plotinus on that question, but I keep trying.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to