Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Agnosticism proceeds from the fact that such concepts as God and infinity are unknowable or can only be partially understood, so it does not matter in principle whether to identify them or not.
Spinoza, in his Ethics, identified God and all things as such: “Theorem 14
Apart from God, no substance can exist or be represented.
Proof. Since God is an absolutely infinite being, in whom no attribute expressing the essence of substance can be denied (according to Op. 6), and he necessarily exists (according to v. 11), if there were any substance other than God, it would have to be expressed by some attribute of God, and thus there would be two substances with the same attribute; and this (according to v. 5) is impossible; therefore, For if it could be represented, it would necessarily have to be represented as existing, and this (according to the first part of this doc.) is impossible. Hence, outside of God, no substance can exist or be represented; which was to be proved.”
Briefly the logic is as follows: God is everything, and if something is not God, then he is not omnipotent and not all-encompassing, therefore everything is God.
In any case, none of this can be fully proved or disproved, so in any case, everyone makes a decision for themselves.